Illarion.org

I agree, but I think we found our "Bror"

I can't be your Bror because I have neither the time or expertise to reprogram this game back to when its original when it was fun and interesting. However, I can present my view on what went wrong with this game and hopefully if not reverse then slow the decline of this game.

You aren't literally Bror, but the psuedo Bror on that RPG site. I agree, but whining about it wont do a thing. Ingame action must be made by the players.

Now I am confused. But as for ingame action by the players, only players with the motivation can initiate ingame action, and only an intuitive, interesting game system can give players that motivation.

They are related, and you can't have one without the other. An inherently boring and tiresome game won't have players with motivation. And players without motivation will not initiate the ingame roleplay action that can breathe life into a game.

EDIT

Aagoth I don't blame you the simpleton that you are for not understanding in the least what I was trying to say so I will go into more detail for your sake. It was a self regulating system in the old client. Though there were no name cops, those people with the names like Killa1341 dropped out of the game very soon. Most likely they lost interest or were converted. In any case, 'bad names' were as common in the old client as they are today. Repeat PKers were easily identified and soon banned in the old client. So there was no bother to the roleplayers and the potential good new players were given the chance to mature.

Conscience wrote:
Why was it like this in the old client? Clueless newbies, powergamers, bad name players all were able to join the game. Yet the roleplay thrived. This is because back then all these 'bad players' were swiftly incorporated into the community and transformed into skilled roleplayers. In fact many of the roleplayers here whining about stricter name rules today were once some of these bad players.

In addition, the mechanics of the game were much more simple and intuitive in the old client. So new and old players alike working with this intuitive system were able to focus far more energy and time on roleplaying. It was a cycle that kept revolving to expand and expand this game both in roleplay depth and quality player base. In contrast, we have the vicious cycle of today where elitism, excessive realism, and an annoying nitpicking at technicalities has slowly but surely degraded this game to its present condition of having shallow, boring roleplay at best and a increasingly deprived player base.

So hush Sian and fellow nitpickers. Althought you cannot be blamed owing to ignorance on your part as you were not here at all 2-3 years ago when this game was at its height, you still have no right to go about making the illarion situation worse than it already is.

Ah ok i get it!

A: Greetings!
B: Greetings!
A: What is your name?
B: Pokerlord1293 LOL
A: Ah ok Pokerlord1293
_________________________

Sounds like good roleplaying! Oh the freak and i supose to go around calling comeone Pokerlord1293, when first Poker hasn tbeen invented and WHO THE FREAK HAS #s in their names! I've known no person 'cept junior and 3rds and so on. But no 1,293s. I mean come on that take away fromt he reality!

Ok im done.

Conscience wrote:Now I am confused. But as for ingame action by the players, only players with the motivation can initiate the ingame action, and only an intuitive, interesting game system can give players that motivation.

They are related, and you can't have one without the other. An inherently boring and tiresome game won't have players with motivation. And players without motivation will not initiate the ingame roleplay action that can breathe life into a game.

No, I and other players find it interesting to create new groups or make new drama ingame.

Good morning, Conscience.

I had initially intended a longer, and more amusing post.

But rest assured, I agree more with you than you'd like to accept.

So hush now, and start using your real forum account, so people other than me will start respecting your opinions more (which I support). Needless to say, I always use the same account to take crap from Einsteins like Aegohl, and I will not back down from what I say. I imagine quite easily you do not go gushing over my posts, but I forgive you your ignorance towards noticing when there is more than meets the eye within something that I write:

Moirear Sian wrote:

Aegohl wrote: Really, though, I'm getting tired of this "the powergaming rule is subjective" crap. So is the account system. So is the way you're treated on the board on a given day. Shall we replace the account system *and* the players entirely with robots, because of their failure of remaining steady?

That is what I am saying, yes.

You call me nitpicker, I see myself as an extremist.
Harsh rules or good guidelines, what would you say?
I don't know how many times I can repeat myself and say the same things over and over again, as such I try to bring some dynamics into things and provoke people to think in different ways. In short, I feel I have become a burden to this community, and had best "leave" (in the sense that I shut up in the forums, and do not participate in game any more with my seriousness). I strongly hope you will continue where I left off.

With your "real" account.

As I feel pretty sure in assuming who you may actually be, I would not be all too worried about people respecting your opinions less. Rather, I believe they'd respect them even more, if you finally came out on the open.

To everybody else:
Take this however you like, just don't forget we're still speaking of a computer game on the internet.

Moirear, how can I use my 'real forum account'? I no longer play this game seriously, and this is the only forum account I have been posting with for some time. Furthermore, other forum accounts represent characters played ingame, it makes no sense to use forum accounts made for ingame purposes to express out of character opinions. What purpose would be served for me to use character forum accounts other than to satisfy the prying, debauched urges of some nosy busybodies on this board?

Concerning the respect of other posters, I really could not care less. People that will only acknowledge the opinions of those that can influence their "success" in the game are not worth my time.

Lastly, in rereading my former post I realize I singled you out unfairly as a nitpicker. I was wrong to do so and I regret it. It was an honest mistake that came about because you were the most expressive in your expletives and the starter of this topic. It is not your fault at all that the game is no longer fun, and I am going to take out your name from the posting because I had no right to accuse you of being nitpicker #1.

Also I am sorry that you feel that I do not respect your postings. This is not the case and if that message was sent it was surely not my intention. I cannot control your actions, but I would exhort for you to continue in your important work in adding new dynamics to this game. It would be a shame to have an intelligent person like yourself cease participating, since the decline of this game would most certainly be sped up, in the long run, with your loss.

And I cannot 'continue where you left off' because I have almost irrevocably lost interest in this game, and my remarks here came about only due to past passion for the game. I did not expect my advice to be heeded, and I do not expect it now. The only reason I even spoke out was because I felt it would be irresponsible not to since this game in the past did give me much joy. In short, I will undoubtedly not be active in trying to save this game aside from the occasional uncontrollable outburst stemming from remorse at the game's continued degeneration.

Summary of earlier points of misunderstanding:

Two different and non-mutually exclusive propositions were made:

Proposition A) The overriding hypothetical philosophy by the GMs that they would have deemed this name acceptable even knowing about the "status" of the name.
Proposition B) What actually happened was that a GM did not know the "status" of the name.

Moirear: A and B are not mutually exclusive, since A is hypothetical and B is actual. So although the existance of A cancels out the significance of B, be careful in noting that A does not cancel out the existance of B, as otherwise implied by your quoting of A in response to Martin's assertion of B.

Martin: Nobody cares about what "actually happened" given that the other GMs have already asserted that proposition A would have been the overriding hypothetical procedure, making B irrelevant. The continuing assertion of B only adds a pointless complication to this discussion. Also, note that Galim's comments were made based on A, not the denial of B.

Aeoghl: Using the word "alienate" implies a treament that is hostile or dissociative to the player, which nobody suggested to do, so not the best choice of words there. I'm sure people just wanted to see just the name gone/changed, for the better of all.

In any case, as it turned out, drawing attention to the improper name has led to it being eliminated without driving away the player itself, so in the end it's a win-win situation for all, and didn't operate to chase new players away, as some of you implied.

The only important point to draw from all this and which might be worthy of discussion, is that given point A and the "liberal" philosophy of your GMs Estralis, Japeth, etc., where you might be now and where you want to be, as a community, on the scale of balancing various aspects of quality and quantity in your game.

No. No, it hasn't drawn attention to the improper name and led to it being eliminated. The name was eliminated hours before this argument began, as I had already said.

And, yes, I feel that arguing for (how many pages now?) about a mistake that a player has already dealt with, not to even mention in a language that he has trouble with, on a board he doesn't have an account on, while he is just being introduced to the community, *is* alienating him.

I am quite aware of the definitions of the words with which I use, Sir Grammarian.

As for the object about the "liberal" policies of Japheth and Estralis, this is a matter of policy that was always meant to be so, but does not necessarily apply to names in the same way. However, names are not to be judged on the basis of their being "stupid," which is something that GM's got away with in the past. Names that are from popular video games still violate the rules.

In this i agree with Aegohl, in doing act like this a character would feel alienated as he would deem it as have done something wrong on his part. And if he were to argue in his defence, being a new member of the community he may see it as loseing his chance to ' fit ' in.

Why do people bring such matters to the public's attention surely it could be better settled through PM. We wish to attract players not scare them away with rules i make a point of breaking constantly. They are guidelines and should be seen as such. If allowances for rules were not made no progress can be made in any task.

Certainly queery a GM about a name which you disagree with, but why on earth create a public topic about a name which im sure the PO was not aware broke the rules...

What's driving players away is rather the way such issues are treated here.
For the sake of goodness, can this never be put to rest or at least be discussed in a civilised way?

If I were the player complained about like this in absence, I would feel pretty pushed back by the community.

Aegohl wrote:No. No, it hasn't drawn attention to the improper name and led to it being eliminated. The name was eliminated hours before this argument began, as I had already said.

Oh, my mistake. But my point is that I believe it would have, and that it was all people were really trying to accomplish, abit a private information might have been more quaint, it did serve to open the door to seeing where you as a community stand on the aforementioned scale. For those reasons, I don't condemn the potential usefulness of this dicussion as much as others might.

Aegohl wrote: And, yes, I feel that arguing for (how many pages now?) about a mistake that a player has already dealt with, not to even mention in a language that he has trouble with, on a board he doesn't have an account on, while he is just being introduced to the community, *is* alienating him.

I am quite aware of the definitions of the words with which I use, Sir Grammarian.

You sound rather skeptical of my advice and intentions, regrettably. However, I still contend that "alienating" does not properly describe your mentioned symptoms, and that the word's ascribed negative effects towards the player himself was not intended/imminent, nor was the player himself or his actions the real point of discussion/scrutiny. If you still feel that it was the appropriate word to describe your feelings or the actions of others, so be it. But be warned that the alledged purpotrators of said actions will likely deny it and consider it a blatantly created accusation by you, such as Moirear did. Regrettably, some others like Moirear might feel the same undue condemnation for his accused actions/intentions as much as what we wouldn't want for the new player either.

Even though I can understand what you are saying Dyluck, I would think a lot of the other people reading the thread would not. I would be happy to put your post in easier words, or atleast make a summary of it. Next time, think of your audience before you post (because I do not think you directed it solely towards Aegohl).

You are right, and this may be due to the fact that I just came out of "essay" mode before this, where slightly more complicated writing is often needed to articulate the exact ideas. Then again, I'm also just me. Glad to move to a lighter side of discussion, by the way.

First off, thank you Dyluck, Conscience, and anybody else who actually read and did not just flame me for this thread, or accuse me falsely of things like alienating a new player. I'll elaborate herein why these statements are not only misleading, but downright false.

So here goes some necroposting:

Moirear Sian wrote:I'm thinking the GMs should be more careful when accepting names.

Or regularly go over the list of characters in the database.

No offense to whoever is behind the character, but

"Vincent Valentine"

is, errr... no comment on what I think about that.
Let's say it just infringes some rules, and I see this kind of thing about once every week or two.

Not a comment towards the player. Not a single insult.
Instead, it's obviously directed towards the GMs, or simply the people behind accepting character names.
You'd think that people who can read, can deduce this on first glance.
According to Aegohl, the name was changed before I posted this, and I am therefore some sort of monster to post this on the forum. However, this is completely erroneous. First off, there is a certain amount of time that passed between my posting of this and when I saw the name in the online player viewer. Secondly, there was no open statement to this, I cannot read internal boards concerning this, nor can I read people's minds; therefore it is completely retarded to complain about my public posting of this, ESPECIALLY under consideration that it was not directed at the player in question. This again, is a petty remark of Aegohl's, directed against me, because Aegohl, personally, does not like me. I will elaborate on that further below. Thus, alienating the player is a completely void argument. As the player's character will never be identified as the same one as mentioned, with exception of the very few people who were actually in game at that time and interacted with him/her.

I also hereby announce, if the player behind the character with that name felt in any way offended by anything I wrote, this is an open apology. I hereby state this was clearly not even directed towards you. I can't really complain about people not reading the rules, because the website is designed alright, but somewhat monotonously, and there is alot to read, as such it is difficult to digest all the rules quickly. Furthermore, it is also possible that you might not have even deliberately known that the name "Vincent Valentine" was used for a character in a different game. If you have any questions, comments, or do need any tips or advice, feel free to PM me.

After my post, other people started talking about this subject. Absolutely unnecessary. The thread could have consisted of my post, a GM or Martin commenting on it, and the story would have been done. For the sake of simplicity, I'll jump down to my next post.

Moirear Sian wrote:I would not have said anything against "Vick Valentine", let's put it that way.

But after having pointed "Musashi" and "Raistlin" out to the GMs in the recent past, I would have thought they are a bit more careful.

By now it should be 200% clear that my concern is not even with the player having used that name, but with the GMs, and the policies for name rules (which were somewhat clarified, as well as rectified on this thread).

Then. Surprise surprise. The thread heats up. I did not do a single thing to this. You can go over every post. I was actually spending time with that thing we call Real Life. Yeah, I was not even here, instead, I was trying to sleep off the nauseous feeling I was experiencing, and trying to lose the taste of blood in my mouth (I am ill at the time being). In that time while I was away, this thread exploded. Completely unnecessarily. It's not even like a single GM came and made a single, clear statement on behalf of the entire staff like professionals would do, no, a giant chaos broke out, where different opinions were tossed around on the subject, not even anymore the player in question. I assume this is the reason the thread was not locked, either, because there is margin for discussion in this subject (which however, when I state this, Aegohl bashes down whatever I say, regardless of what I say.)

In fact, there is not a single post of mine until page 4.

Moirear Sian wrote:Sorry for sounding anal about the name rules, but keeping half the rules the game currently has, is ambiguous, misleading, and actually more anal than me complaining about names, because in fact, all I'm doing is following the God damn rules (I repeat: this is not directed at Martin, but the other people on this thread acting like its no biggie when players read names that I associate to 200% to existing characters).

According to your philosophy, we should dump the powergaming rules, or character naming rules, in favor of getting more players? Or what? I've suggested this in the past, and been flamed over it. Now you change your minds on the fly, and want to continue flaming and treating me like some idiot? Shove it up your rectal canals, you arrogant snobs.

We need a unified front of rules that both players and staff can stick with, then we can continue talking like grown-ups.

Either that or ditch the rules before you complain about someone reminding people to follow the aforementioned rules.

As you seem to not notice that all I had aimed the initial post for was so that someone notices that a name is violating the rules, and hopefully also so that a new player will see this right off the start before they (perhaps unintentionally) break the rules again.

PS: Pardon if this post is very angry, offensive, and aggressive, but you can go back to the initial post and see that I began in a completely different tone. Sum up that I'm having a hard time lately, and that I am sick and tasting blood in my mouth still, I'm pretty bloody pissed over this semantic bull, to say the least.

This post was clearly meant as provocation, and neatly wrapped up with an included apology, which was added before I submitted the post. Provocation for what? The player in question? Not at all. Rather the veteran players, and staff who had thus commented so far.

I'll purposely leave out a bunch of posts in between here, because they are clearly geared at heating up people to discuss the subject, and not the player in question. Also note the title of the thread. It is not written 'name', but 'names', indicating the word in plural, and also indicating that the subject was more general, and not focused on the name in question. Not once was this changed, and it was such straight off the beginning. During the course of these posts, several staff members gave comments and statements towards the situation given by the first post. Not once did any of them direct the discussion in a new direction. Not a single time did any pick up on it. Everybody exaggerated the thread to be a bashing of the player who had used the character name "Vincent Valentine", which it, right off the beginning, had NOT been. In case you are inable to read or understand English, I have repeated this several times now. If you go gloating about what a horrible person I am and how wrong it is what I'm doing, you are clearly ignorant and should be ashamed of yourself.

Finally, this leads me to Aegohl. The person behind Aegohl -- used to know me off the game. I will not go into detail, but Aegohl has given me, on several occasions, more than enough reasons to assume that he does not like me, and that I should not bother him. Whenever I told him something that also contained questions, I would never receive reply from him. I could practically always sense how the person behind "Aegohl" is rolling his eyes when he reads anything I write, regardless of what I write. He already did this with a previous forum personality of his before he even became GM, and he obviously has some grudge against me, because ever since I returned to Illarion, the person behind this elusive "Aegohl" has done everything in his power to block me out of his life. It is in truth Aegohl, why I am quitting Illarion again for an indefinite amount of time.

Here is the final nail to the coffin, in which Aegohl shamefully tries to get the last word, and make me look like an idiot, yet again:

Aegohl wrote:No. No, it hasn't drawn attention to the improper name and led to it being eliminated. The name was eliminated hours before this argument began, as I had already said.

And, yes, I feel that arguing for (how many pages now?) about a mistake that a player has already dealt with, not to even mention in a language that he has trouble with, on a board he doesn't have an account on, while he is just being introduced to the community, *is* alienating him.

Dyluck may have brought the subject up again, but also Dyluck, Conscience, other people, and myself included, were clearly shifting the subject in a direction of its own. This has absolutely no relation to the "Vincent Valentine", "Musashi", "Raistlin", or whatever name that has been accepted in the past and clearly violated the naming rules. With these words, you are again directing a thread in the direction it was not intended for, nor are you at all considering the content thereof. I deduce something from this.
You are either:
a) xenophobic of the possible results such a discussion could entail,
b) or you are too ignorant to read anything properly without losing your temper with people whom you do not like in the first place,
c) or have some reason I cannot comprehend.

Aegohl wrote:I am quite aware of the definitions of the words with which I use, Sir Grammarian.

As he goes to lengths to mock me in his typical fashion, he also places a statement which he himself might find very original and clever, which is directed toward Dyluck, and somewhat out of place, considering the niveau Dyluck put into his post. If everybody wrote on Dyluck's level of writing and understanding, I think these forums would be alot more agreeable to some people.

I go to mock you here too Aegohl. Such remarks are out of place, and unacceptable for a GM. It's funny that before you were a GM, you were no different. Truth be told, I am surprised you were even selected as a GM. I found your roleplaying capabilities decent, but not outstanding, just like my own. Your commitment towards the game is probably all that speaks for you in my eyes. Drop this offensive attitude of yours, and do yourself a favor of not repeating some mistakes that were committed by someone else in the past, because quite frankly, I see patterns repeating themself which I wish not to further elaborate on.

Guess what Aegohl. You can pat yourself on the back, and you win. You are the first person on Illarion, who has truly managed to draw my dislike. I don't mean a temporary whim. I mean loathing, hate. Now, I really do not like you either, and the feeling is finally mutual. You should work on your short fused temper, lower your profile on the forums, and act more professionally, despite not being paid. I will not kiss your ass just because you work for free. I have put a good deal of my free time into the game as well, that gives you no right to denounce me or anybody else who does the same.

Finally, I am greatly disappointed in Aristeaus and Adano. They too, veteran players, do not even begin with the subject. Obviously they do not read anything either, because when it says Moirear Sian on the post, it must be offensive, without content, and therefore unimportant for Illarion.

Aristeaus wrote:Certainly queery a GM about a name which you disagree with, but why on earth create a public topic about a name which im sure the PO was not aware broke the rules...

Excuse me, but not even the GMs had a unified front of who is responsible for this. Apparently, the entire staff is. And there is e-mail address like gm_abuse@illarion.org, only violations@illarion.org. I did not consider this a severe offense, as stated one million times (blunt exaggeration), as that, I thought I'd make it a public topic to discuss the subject, as well. Why you put up a play of surprise why I bring up the subject? A mystery to me, as you should know me by now, Darren.

Adano Eles wrote:What's driving players away is rather the way such issues are treated here.
For the sake of goodness, can this never be put to rest or at least be discussed in a civilised way?

If I were the player complained about like this in absence, I would feel pretty pushed back by the community.

You too, state that what I did is downright false and stupid.
You do not consider for a split-second that what you write there is an offense to me. It is an over-generalization, and I do not believe that you got the comment from the player in question that they felt pushed back at all. Aegohl even states above that his/her forum account as well, was yet to become a novelty for the new player -- the chances, that he/she read this before the case was closed, are equal to zero, unless someone is lying above. Obviously, some people can neither read, nor combine given statements into a greater whole, and your native language is not a valid excuse in this case, because I know your grasp of English is rather good.

In reference to Aegohl's latest reply, Dyluck wrote this:

Dyluck wrote:You sound rather skeptical of my advice and intentions, regrettably. However, I still contend that "alienating" does not properly describe your mentioned symptoms, and that the word's ascribed negative effects towards the player himself was not intended/imminent, nor was the player himself or his actions the real point of discussion/scrutiny.

In closing, Dyluck says it all within a single paragraph, for which I had to post this ungodly long statement to clarify things for the people who are inable to read and understand what they read.

The only one being alienated on this thread here is clearly me.

And with that I make my leave again.

I will not bother you anymore with my putrid, oozing presence, because obviously there is more than enough of that around here, making my presence redundant.

Good-bye for now, Illarion.

Eric

Sian, what I wrote was not even directed towars you personally. But whenever I see a topic like this going into such a direction I feel like looking into the mud-pool of humanity.
It's not about the initial subject, I have a problem with the fact that such threads can never end when there is everything important being said, and instead it evolves into a flame war of obvious misunderstandings, people feeling themself threatened somehow or seem to hold grudges against each other.
These threads don't neccissarily draw a good image of our community.
If I'd see everyone going at each others throats I'd not be too appealed, especially if the initial reason is my selection of a character name, no matter how often the topic is turned around.

Edit:
As you might have noticed, I did not post anything here until this morning, when I looked into the boards and saw that this topic exploded to seven pages overnight. Seven pages which are absolutely not neccissary.

Mr Sian, that was not directed to you i was speaking in general terms This is not the first one of these posts created. My view is that these posts are made by people seeking attention. It could more easily be solved through PM. Ill read through your post later, am busy.

Aristeaus wrote:Mr Sian, that was not directed to you i was speaking in general terms This is not the first one of these posts created. My view is that these posts are made by people seeking attention. It could more easily be solved through PM. Ill read through your post later, am busy.

Edit : And by attention i meen a discussion :p

I just saw a character with the name "Lillith" ingame.

could it be possible to ask the palyer to change that name? reason read here:

http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/lillith.html

...Please tell me that was sarcasm, Galim. Please.

Lillith is an actual name, I've never met anyone irl named Bezelbub... Jeez.

No it wasn't

Or the gms also have to allow "Belzebub", "Satan" or "Lucifer". it is the same at the end.

You are being too picky...

Do we have to even question the source... i never heard of him....

Satan is a lot more known name that Lillith is, when it comes to the bible and such. Lillith is also a real name people use I believe? You don't see anyone naming their child satan, not that I know of anyways.

My girlfriend was named Lillith, and she was no hebrew. That was some true picky picky pickyness there.

Okay, Galim-enough! You could have PMed a GM about this. I don't see why the name should god. My aunt is called Lillith, I know two other Lilliths, it's a common name.

http://www.galim-hotel.co.il

The point is, is that Lillith is a common name. This post does not suggest for you to change yours either.

Question--> i had given a name, which was rejected... any ideas y? it seems ok to me

Aydrien Greenleaf

For an elf

LOL, Galim do you google every name you see?