Danny

Firstly, congratulations. Here's hoping this is a step towards a better, more enjoyable server for the whole community. Best of luck! I'm sure you can appreciate the scepticism from Matt there Tel, it's not the first time we've been told concerns are being addressed before they're just left behind. I'm sure more in-depth and tangible consultation over the matters raised in today's (and last week's) threads would enable not only a more trusting playerbase, but moreover a better 6.0 to be developed with all perspectives being considered. Regardless, here's hoping that said concerns are addressed in full this time.

This should be being dealt with now in consultation with the community, that's one of the key issues. This shroud of secrecy does nothing but breed suspicion that the same mistakes are going to be repeated and the playerbase ignored in favour of closeted staff decisions.

That's why you don't introduce freebuild in isolation but rather in connection with a number of other things, one being increased expectations from the GM team. 100%. There's a lot of things necessary for freebuild to work and it's our failure to do these, coupled with a failure to freebuild the whole map previously, that has seen previous attempts fail. If we introduce all of the mechanics, systems and rules correctly, freebuild works as both a roleplay-enhancer and roleplay-centraliser. The 6.0 team need to listen to this before it's another flop, some engagement on this thread would perhaps be a start. You are a Saint.

Freebuild is by far the best option for LotC's upcoming map, as it has been for prior ones, as explained in previous posts in this thread.

100%. I don't think anybody would advocate freebuild on its own. It has to be managed carefully via the mixture of mechanics discussed in this thread. It's essentially indirect forcing of rp ino central map limits whilst still allowing that risky freedom of Minecraft gameplay.

The idea behind free-build is indeed the centralisation of roleplay that stems as a consequence of it being implemented in connection with other mechanics and systems to ensure said centralisation occurs. The other major benefit of it is what it provides to players, that being the ability to actually play Minecraft. We offer a platform for players to play a character within Minecraft and consequently we need to offer both experiences. Roleplay is centralised via an antagonist that can attack anywhere in the wilderness, at any point. GMs need to ensure they work regularly to watch building styles and works in the wilderness, ensuring there's no non-rp (e.g. underground tunnel bases) and destroying them if found. Also, relaxed villainy rules and the ability to take much more in said areas helps. The result is a dynamic world where players can interact with what's around them, but one that is filled with structures that meet our roleplay expectations, are actively used and where dwelling so far out is discouraged in favour of the much safer central areas where roleplay is then found. It works, it's worked before and will work again. Personally, I stand entirely against any further regioning other than racial capitals on the basis that I still stand of the view that should be no more than one official nation per race because we do not have the playerbase to meet what that requires. Only scenario where it should be extended is if there is a substantial, substantial playerbase in a settlement and even then that settlement must be in the central map area and will not get the same benefits and protections as capitals. People won't like it but sometimes that's just tough luck. It may well be true that Minecraft was larger then, but the impact of this on us should be minimal if we manage the server correctly. We have a huge ex-playerbase that if we take the right action we can re-engage and we can offer a unique experience to the wider Minecraft community if we just start doing things right instead of constanly repeating the same mistakes.

As I explained in previous posts, that's the opposite of what a freebuild map creates and is an issue that emerges from restricted freebuild instead. Effective moderation is the answer to such ills along with carefully planned mechanics to make wilderness building risky. Let's not misunderstand the proposal here. Wanting freebuild =/= empty towns as explained earlier. The only way it can is through lazy and poor moderation. If done correctly (as outlined in previous posts) the system results in a dynamic world that is more engaging and immersive.

Which is exactly what I'm saying. Previous attempts haven't been effective, and this time they must be. GMs must design and enact a policy that recognises the importance of freebuild and allows it but that tackles bad builds and inactivity. Poor moderation does not mean we can make ridiculously bad decisions and region everything, destining ourselves to poor roleplay, a crap world and a continuing decline.

You misunderstand the idea of a freebuild map. Freebuild areas are destined to fail due to restriveness they imply and the fact they don't achieve the point of freebuild. A freebuild map enables concentrated roleplay in key rp hubs (these being the only regioned areas) with outliers discouraged via risks and threats and lack of protection in the wilderness areas. Effective GM policy tackles inactivity and enforcement of building rules keeps the server looking attractive. The end result is roleplay centralised in hubs, the world is interactive and dynamic and people get to play Minecraft. The only reason it could fail is due to poor implementation - admins and GMs do it right, LOTC gets exactly what it requires. You can have both. Roleplay centralises in main hubs, towns of any kind in the wilderness are initially discouraged by higher mob spawning, constant antagonist threat and higher villainy. Of course people will still settle and that's okay, that's kinda the idea of freebuild. Construction is moderated based on building rules and inactivity = buildings ruined. You keep your dynamic world, the interactivity of freebuild and the concentration of roleplay. You just need efficient GM enforcement.

And combined with harsher mob spawning plus threat of a good antagonist as well as increased risk of villainy in such outer areas, players are encouraged to engage at centralised rp hubs but are still given the freedom to.. play Minecraft?

Above please. City placement is the make-or-break for this. Let's make sure we do it right for this map. 8,000 is bearable on the basis that we keep main cities within a reasonable distance to each other (like Dalek's map has) with the outer areas acting as mega-danger zones, preferably with stepped mob-spawning the further you go.

Thanks for the update. The map looks good, even if perhaps slightly over-aestheticised for my liking (too early to say...), but very nice. Only question is re journey from spawn to racial capitals. We know a single road acts as a hotbed of activity enabling roleplay to be found either along that arterial route or at the ends (the cities) of it. What are the plans here? From what I can see a singular main road won't fit in (depending on location of CT), so what's the plan? Please though, as other's have already said, the map needs to free-build. Don't bother boxing free-land into set areas and then regioning everything else, that's pointless and doesn't work. Please, for the love of God, make it all free build with the exception of racial capitals and the roads (and keep these numbers loooowwww, we don't have a player base capable of sustaining so many bloody cities). People don't like it but if you want rp to become less dispersed and actually provide a good experience, it's a necessity. The GM team are more than capable of watching and nurturing the landscape for ****builds and inactivity, it's part of the job. If done right, this could well be LOTC's best map.

100%. Fast travel systems are a symptom of poor map design. A well designed map (which hopefully is what we're going to have) should have its key locations within easy and quick access from spawn, max fifteen minute journey to the furthest, else it's too dispersed and roleplay spread too thin. Having a map built on that premis eliminates any need for fast travel and encourages centralised roleplay in the cities and on roads. We don't have a community sizeable enough to fill a space any larger.

If so, definitely not sufficient a reason to have a system in place that's detrimental to roleplay. Another reward can be made that can satisfy well enough. Professions systems are inherently poor anyway, so if a reasonable benefit-based skills system is introduced there wouldn't be any need to pay for swapping professions.

That's one of the worst arguments I have ever heard for professions... How, by any stretch of the imagination, does it make the server money? The server would make more money if it had more players, amusingly enough something achievable by listening to said players. I think skills systems are actually good but only if they add benefits and have no restrictions whatsoever. Any system that restricts a player is detrimental to roleplay. It should be simple benefits for non-combat skills (no combat skills) e.g. getting an extra log from a tree and that's the full extent of it.

If the issue that lies with the admin team is the fact they aren't able to handle that full oversight well, then who's actually in the team need to be readdressed and action taken to correct it. My perspective on the admin team is that they should directly influence and make decision making on all matters with teams and team leaders in place for the implementation and leadership. Decision making for big issues (e.g. development) should lie solely with admin team who should make decisions on the basis of consultation with the developers and the GM team. 100% with you that admins need to be brutal and fully honest with their stance and thoughts. There's always been an issue with people not being fully clear and it's something that needs readdressed - if you're in that position and making decisions you also have the responsibility to not hide away but to be clear. You mention a dev-admin meeting, I agree. But I think we need to go further because there's a huge number of issues with the server that need a multi-perspective approach. I still stand by what I suggested earlier with a group being formed of staff members, older members and new members. I agree with intiuitive systems being in place and the click-and-hover achieves that. The GUI system fails to achieve it at all though because it's not intuitive. New player retention is the sole responsibility of staff. Players can help, 'o doubt about that and they should do so, offering a welcoming and supportive embrace but the job lies with staff and how they design the server. Plugins, applications, website and lore must all be directed in a way that is welcoming and works effectively for a new player (hence why the multi-perspective group allows us to get these views without our old-player inertia.

Remove region and charter systems like this in their entirety and return to the only system which actually effectively allows a concentration of roleplay into hubs and forces player interactivity. LotC continues to ignore what it's repeatedly done wrong and refuses to acknowledge where things worked better - region and charter systems should not have any place here. Frankly, I fully advocate a free-build system being established with the only regioned areas being a) racial capitals (not any player / breakaway cities) and b) main roads with a 10 block radius also to protect the side of them. You give everybody regioned plots and everybody goes to those plots and doesn't travel. People don't like the idea of not getting those regions but that's just tough. Use GMs to watch the landscape and ensure nobody is building hideous buildings, ruin them if they are. Watch inactivity, ruin it. Introduce systems that make being in the wilderness dangerous e.g. higher mob spawning, higher levels of villainy. Roleplay concentrates into capitals when this system is in place as they're the only safe location to be - building in wilderness is a risky strategy and accordingly roleplay tends to move away from it. It's a system that's engaging for new players but also avoids dispersion of roleplay and city building due to the risks involved.

To be honest, if one of the primary issues with the current map is stagnant rp, option A (whilst it will be unpopular) does seem the most rational way to go. It ensures a concentration of roleplay which is currently too far dispersed into a smaller area which enables it to be much easier to find, frankly forcing people to engage with one another. I know too little about the current map set up and rp hubs to say much more. With regards to the coming map, I appreciate this is not a thread for discussing this, but please learn from the mistakes of previous maps and ensure it is a concentrated roleplay environment, not too large, with minimal large cities (ideally one per race, however unpopular) and these cities and any arterial roads being the only the regioned areas. Regardless of how some will resist this, we know from the past that it's the most efficient way to encourage roleplay and enable interactivity with the world. Combined with effective GM efforts it also does not have any issues with griefing or land scarring which are the main concerns with it. Concentrate roleplay forcibly via a basic, non-eccentric and non-artificial map design and a free build policy coupled with a review of server policy and plugins.

100% with you here, pop a read at the post I made literally seconds before you there. I think the server as a whole needs a complete reviw, from new player experience up to plugin development, to identify it's major failings and take action to resolve them. Sadly, none of the successive admin teams have managed to organise themselves in a manner which has enabled this to be done and I still feel skeptical it will ever be done (I include myself in that successive failure). The whole thing needs to be relooked at in a way led by the administration (who if not willing or capable should step down) and aided by staff and players - a collaborative approach to correct the server's ills and bring it back to growth. I approve of this. I've always had issues with expressing myself in a succinct manner. I did add a tl;dr to my initial post!

Thanks for taking the time to respond Tel. I stand by the original point I made re dev leadership in server development as that is the way it was. Vaq did exercise the most control over plugins but he did not work on anything without approval of GM/Admin team and if they refused it, that's how it was. Reag and Alec likewise only worked on projects approved by the Gm/Admin team and whilst they did come up with their own (as all dev's did) again, they did not have final say. Nor did you when you became a dev (coder at the time, iirc - before all of these new ranks!). By far, you were the most motivated we'd had in terms of developing and toying with new ideas but they were still under the final say of GM & Admin scrutiny which is why we had such long discussions over Nexus, etc. If we'd decided to go against it, it wouldn't be on the server and a number of changes were made as a result of those discussions - I can easily find the threads re this as they're now in the public Misc archive. The simple fact of the matter is that right up until, I guess Sporadic's time(?), whilst development and ideas did lie in the remit of the developers the final decision making and overall direction lay directly in the hands of the GM and Admin teams and that's exactly how it needs to be. I know you very passionately believe that plugin and mechanic development should lie in the remit of the development team but I simply can't accept this, and if I'd remained an admin I wouldn't have accepted it. If the administration team isn't willing to put their full attention onto matters (e.g. plugins) that are instrumental to the server experience then they shouldn't be in their positions and they should be replaced by someone with the willingness to focus on directing plugin development in full connection with server development. I 100% stand by the fact that developers should have the freedom to exercise their ideas and to promote their ideas (e.g. your mammoth Nexus 1.0 document you created before Nexus and how you showed it on the dev server prior to any meaningful progress for admin and GM review) but the final say and the full guidance should come from the top-layer of server management without exception - it's a point where we have failed, it's a point where we continue to fail and it's a point that we aren't going to stop failing on until it's recognised. Turning to GUI interfaces, as a matter of fact I really do like the current chat engine. It's exactly the kind of compromise that I'd personally like to have seen implemented for all mechanics rather than any of the inventory-esque, GUI schemes. It's an example of the kind of mechanic that you guys realise the potential of and do a fantastic job of implementing. Regardless, the inventory-esque GUI systems remain in place for some things (e.g. /me) which when in the chat window didn't give you a tsunami of text as it was a 5/6 line max well formatted window which had commands (now has the potential for hover & click) to allow navigation and changes and that's the way it should be. I will happily stand here and recognise that there has been a clear shift in development style from the 2013/4 era where 'flashy' did seem to be the main focus, whether intended or not. Plugins now are better, but it's still not good enough. With the launch of a new map, the plugins and server mechanics need to be completely re-addressed before a map is launched with mechanics that still fail it, and then all you're destined for is another map. That's exactly why full Admin & GM oversight of the development team is a necessity and needs to be in place, so a fully neutral review of server plugins can recognise where we're going wrong and where we're going good before another map launch is screwed as a result of the server's rules, mechanics and systems not working for it. With regards to new players, I can't help but feel as though that also requires a total review of how we approach them and not just from your corner Tel. Even looking at the forum is a terrifying thing because it doesn't come across as particularly welcoming in the first place. In the status updates you have a bunch of trolling, moronic comments re staff, people bitching about stupid things. On the front page you have a very nicely designed home-page but not one that is a welcoming, inviting and simple landing pages. Our external presence is essentially non-existant, we don't even rank on Google searches for 'Minecraft roleplay' (a server called bloody HelloMiners ranks above us). Again, a completely neutral review of the new player experience incorporating the perspectives of new players, staff and old-players alike seems necessary to identify where the server has continuously failed to attract new players. This group needs to identify how to recover our unique Lord of the Ring's appeal (despite not being a LotR server...) and pull people in and enable them to enjoy the unique experience the server offers. I'm glad you seem focused on improving what issues exist and I'm glad you recognise that there are issues. But, it seems a difficult thing to achieve when frankly the presence of other very important members of staff on issues such as this is non-existent. We've seen threads like these before, an example being Ever's, but no action ended up being taken as a result - it's discussed, promises made, then ignored. I accept I hold no authority on the server anymore, but I think the community deserves action to be taken properly for once. I don't address this solely to you, on the contrary, you remain one of the best members of the current staff team simply due to your dedication and interactions, but to the team as a whole. The server needs to develop listening to these concerns and directly involve the players in making these decisions, particularly when it comes to plugins and new player experience - screw official staff positions, make a small group who have experience from all areas and tackle it head on before the new map comes. If it isn't tackled, it fails. It's as simple as that. I like agreeing with you on most counts Tel, it makes a nice change, ahaha. Regardless, I think it's fairly self-evident that playercount and active player count is at around an all time low. It would be rather disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

I think we have to be very careful here to distinguish between recognition of legitimate and serious issues with the current dev-staff team set-up and the idiots who post "pathetic or useless" and argue against the team simply as a result of a member of their clique leaving / arguing against it. The later is something that all staff experience, and isn't simply limited to dev's, and is indeed something that I wholeheartedly agree with you on. The constant complaints, comments and sarcastic posts do take it out of you and are extremely disheartening, but the simple fact is that it's part of having a position of responsibility within an online community. You're always going to have critics who fail to build real arguments or provide a basis for their opposition but instead simply bicker and slam you for some of the most ridiculous things imaginable - hence why we see irrelevant and joking Skype logs brought up, clearly sarcastic comments used in a serious way as evidence. But at the same time, these kind of players need to realise that nobody is paid for this server, everybody does it out of good-will and the wish to see it become a better community for everyone to enjoy - we all have different views on how to achieve that, but the simple fact is that we all share at least that common goal. If people want to be listened to and consulted on matters then they have to be willing to listen to the staff team's views as well and hold a rational, sensible discussion on topics - something 'Your View' is providing successfully as I type this on the new map transition thread and others. But, the former type of criticism under which heading my previous post lies is that of legitimate criticism and concern with the current system. You're perfectly aware Telanir of my long-standing opposition to systems like Nexus, GUI interfaces and what I see as other very cool, very nifty but completely distracting and detrimental plugins. This isn't a criticism borne out of a grudge or to try and discourage your work, in fact I think we're extremely lucky as a community to have had so many fantastic developers, artists and writers work with us which is how we have such good graphics, fantastic lore and plugins that other servers may well envy, but rather it is a criticism that stems from the a) user-friendliness of our server and b) appeal to outside members. I'm not being funny, but last time I logged in and saw the GUI interface I've never been so irritated in my life with having to hover over each button to find out what it was rather than being able to simply do what Minecraft is designed for and just hit '/me' and getting the old-style character card up. I think the work the dev team does is great, but it can't be directed by them. The administration should hold the sole responsibility for directing everything about the server. The dev team should be there to act upon the instructions of administrators rather than being responsible for consulting and deciding on these ideas. This ties, very clearly, into the other serious issue with the current server, that of a complete lack of clear leadership. The admin team traditionally made their decisions in collaboration with the (old-style) GM team, with administrators having the final say, before passing that onto the developer(s) to produce. Developers were of course communicated with during the process, particularly with regards to the feasibility of the projects, but the decision did not lie in their hands. What this allows is a clear decision making process that enables an administration who has the decision-making powers for all aspects of the server - a new map, rule changes, mechanics, plugins, lore, storyline - and means that these can all be tied together nicely and ensures that the mechanics and plugins introduced are actually beneficial to the community rather than just being made because a developers has thought they're a nice idea and that it'd be cool to add it in. The key focus of LotC's plugin development has sadly turned away from the central tenant of only producing what is 1) beneficial for roleplay and 2) does not require much adaptation from new players. Sadly now the server has plugins which are not only not beneficial for roleplay but that require new players to adapt to an entirely new kind of game from Minecraft which is NOT what they come to LotC looking for. LotC's old success lay in its simplicity, in its in-keeping with traditional Minecraft but in a way that did offer some unique mechanics, but those that were simple and benefited roleplay. The main appeal lay in the unique community we had: one where you could come along as a brand new Minecraft player, or an experience one and as a brand new roleplayer or a D&D-pro and you'd still be welcomed with open arms into a server that you instantly knew how to play. And it's for exactly that reason that LotC is now at its lowest point ever in terms of the grand scheme of things. Different measures of course apply, but in terms of external penetration Google Trends illustrates the story quite clearly (for comparison, Minecraft itself has not experienced such a clear decline and neither has the search term 'Minecraft roleplay' itself). Likewise, there's currently 35 members on the forums right now - there used to be times when we had 10x that during off-peak UK time. Clearly, we're not appealing players as we once did and nor are we catering for players like we once did. Why? I'm very confident the answer lies in the complete dismissal of the server's original message and original ambitions and a movement towards something which is much more of a hard-RP and 'separate from Minecraft' server. I'm not satisfied with that decline, I'm sure many other's aren't, and it's been ignored for way too long now. I may not be as active on the server anymore, but the same problems that existed when I first became an administrator exist now. It may be disheartening to hear people criticise your hard work - it's the same for everyone who has ever held any position of authority on LotC, I used to spend 8-9 hours a day replying to Skype, PMs, forum posts and still get told that I was inactive - but there's a clear line between people being dicks and legitimate complaints and I think it's about time the severity of the issues with the server were actually recognised and acted upon, rather than being dismissed as the development team being described as "pathetic or useless". But despite all that, please do keep up the work that your team does - the server literally couldn't function without the types of developers that it has and I think we all have to recognise and show our gratitude for that. This is far from a criticism of your capacities or abilities but rather a question of how the server need be structured and directed for it to actually turn its continuous decline on its head. Whilst you may not recognise the issues, the people that matter most - the playerbase who you cater for - do. Keep up the work and let's have a sensible, rational and reasoned discussion as this is obviously an issue the community is extremely concerned about but that many don't seem willing to articulate their concern about in a decent way.

In all honesty, this is exactly where the administration has been off-track for the last four years. The administration team is the team that should be directing plugin direction exclusively with developers there to implement the decisions made - administration used to exist to direct overall server direction from rules on the ground-level, plugin ideas being approved for future maps and to be the team responsible for making these decisions. I may not be particularly active on the server anymore - rarely do I log-in - but I do watch closely to what's going on and it seems strange that we still haven't learned from this mistake. You guys do fantastic work, there's little doubt about that, but you shouldn't be here to make executive decisions: that is the role, the responsibility and the very place of the administration team so that such decisions can be made in connection with wider server changes. Neither should the developer team turned into a moderation team with the capacity to ban or make judgments on players - that should be the sole remit of the moderation and admin teams. I also think one of the serious problems that having a developer team making decisions leaves us with, is an inundation of unnecessary plugins that whilst aimed with the best of intentions are in-fact detrimental to server roleplay. I say this conscious of the fact that it sounds as though I am belittling you're decision making capabilities, but trust me I'm not. I simply know from experience that there are problems, specifically those above, that arise when you allow a coding / developer team to make the decisions on mechanics and they're issues that have existed for a long time. I raised these concerns when Nexus was very first proposed by Telanir, in fact I was very vocal in staff chats with my opposition to it - yes, mechanics are lovely but we're here to play Minecraft and roleplay, not to play a different game. This is one of the reasons 3.0 / 4.0 didn't succeed in their aims of 'returning past glories' - we developed maps directed at free Minecraft roleplay but then had mechanics that morphed the very nature of LotC down a different route. I can easily point us towards some of the 4.0 development threads that are now in a public archive to show that despite us aiming for this Minecraft roleplay server we moved away in the final product. Here's a thread on the mechanics for 4.0 that on a number of points we reversed. Even more importantly, here's my 'Twelve Steps to Success' that we held a public and staff vote on that agreed with the removal of 'flashy plugins' for the very reason that whilst they're cool, they're a distraction. And again, here's another staff thread where we specifically discussed moving away from the corporate-esque approach to the playerbase and a movement towards simply focusing on roleplay. Whilst right now I'm sure that I do sound terribly outdated, linking threads from 2013, the points still stand and are still being ignored. There is a reason why the server has a smaller playbase than it used to and why many people no longer enjoy it. It's not simply Minecraft's general decline after the 2011-2013(ish) boom, but it's the fact that our distinct presence no longer exists and hasn't for so long. The idea of LotC is to provide a platform on MINECRAFT for people to roleplay on. I'm all for features that improve that experience, but sadly when you add plugins that morph the game you often find that instead you are providing distractions from that purpose. Keep the plugins that are beneficial, stop messing about with ones that are just cool and flashy - this is Minecraft, not LotC-craft. Here's another another thread that I posted once I'd left the admin team but this time slightly newer (2014). There is little by means of controversial suggestions in this thread, but it's fairly clear from the response that it wasn't simply the view of a disillusioned few. The server needs to learn and to adapt, to realise why it isn't what it once was and to take corrective action to reinspire the community. I finish with one more point. Ditch the secrecy over the coming map. Why do you think every other one has failed? The admin / mod / dev team holing up and making decisions themselves results in decisions being made that are detrimental to the community. Sit down, work with the community and design a map that has LotC's values at its roots. A collaboration of the community as a whole that looks to re-instill our original position as a unique roleplay server that functions on Minecraft's original systems with our own roleplay-beneficial mechanics. And get the message out to the wider Minecraft community that that is what we offer. To be honest, if I was a newbie right now looking at LotC, I'd not even give it a second look - all that it comes across as is an exclusive and frankly scary place to apply to if you're not experienced in roleplay, with an entirely new game to learn once you're in. LotC's purpose was once to embrace inexperienced roleplayers, people who hadn't roleplayed before, and give them a place to learn and develop as part of a wider community - it's failed that purpose, and we've failed every single time we've tried to achieve it. Learn from our god damn mistakes, stop with the 'we know best' attitude and work together to make the server succeed. For clarity, I don't suggest a complete reversal to vanilla Minecraft. What I suggest it a movement away from pointless mechanics that provide nothing in terms of benefit to roleplay but rather provide a distraction for new players who are then put off of enjoying the server i.e. the GUI interface Nexus introduced that I continue to detest to this day. How can we expect new players, many of whom have little experience in roleplay (who in the past have turned into some of our best roleplayers) to actually engage with such a system? They won't, they don't and that's our fault. Keep things that are beneficial: stats systems, character cards, salvaging and live by the idea that just because something is possible to code, doesn't make it good to code. tl:dr - old guy who is barely around moans about the golden old days peace

Good decision my friend. It's easy to hold on and not pass the mantle to someone else and I know perfectly well how difficult it is to make this decision. Makes your life a hell of a lot easier though. Real life always has to come first and sadly sitting in the red chair often gets in the way of it. Best of luck to you. Six years is insane. 2011 was clearly the year to join.