There are, but unless something positive would come out of doing so, I'm not really sure I see the point. The alternative to airing them is of course sticking heads in the sand and hoping it won't happen again; that would perhaps be for the best if indeed there is a collective effort to avoid things again. However, as this has been tried several times unsuccessfully so far, my suggestion would be that people make their grievances known as diplomatically as possible and in private when appropriate (assuming they're directed at any one person).

One issue is that I think it's rather impolite when people come on to the forums blasting an entire (yet vague) group for "crying", being "babies", etc., while referring to themselves as "adults" etc. This certainly is not a terribly constructive thing to say to somebody else, even if it makes you feel better to put somebody else down to look more mature as a result. So I would suggest that people try to hold back the name-calling and accusations of immaturity etc., and try to work this out a little more constructively. If people are acting in some way, they probably feel that they have a reason to do so: telling them they're a whining cry-baby is hardly a respectful way of addressing their concerns.

This is the problem I keep coming to with your approach to things.

Just because someone has a complaint doesn't necessitate action. If I have a player logging in my game and complaining that reaching 0 hp makes them enter into ghost form and all of their equipment drops to the ground in their corpse… what kind of action can I possibly take to that? As someone who runs a game and has to deal with complaints on a pretty regular basis, I can assure you that just because nothing is done about a complaint (not every complaint can be reasonably dealt with, particularly if you feel the complaint isn't warranted or otherwise disagree with it), that doesn't mean it isn't being listened to. I could understand the desire for a response saying "We have received your complaint and it will be reviewed" but I think that would only lead to the further expectation that something would be done about it. I think replying with "We have reviewed your complaint but no action will be taken." or "We have reviewed your complaint but do not find it reasonable." or "We have reviewed your complaint but disagree with your assessment." would probably only leave the person feeling a bit butthurt and open the situation up to argument, or as you say, feel like their complaints are being dismissed.

Someone not getting their way doesn't mean they aren't being listened to, it simply means the people they are complaining to do not feel the same way.

Answer me this, how would you prefer an Administration respond to you in the event that you lodge a complaint you feel is perfectly valid that they completely disagree with and have no plans to take action toward that you find favorable?

Yes, it does. Even if the action is to say, look, there's nothing we can do or defer it to another time, or announce an enquiry into it or quote a rule saying such and such. Not doing *anything* is never an option, sorry.

edit: in fact you give a lot of good examples your self. If you've ever worked on service desk (I'm guessing you haven't? not sure ..) you'd understand silence is never a good thing when customers are concerned.



Fine, as long as they could give me a decent explanation first. If I don't agree, I don't agree, but at least something has happened. Due process should also allow me to take it to another stage if I really really disagree, whereby the Admins could hold an enquiry into the matters at hand.

Actually, I 've seen this sort of thing *in action* on these forums, with the code stealing issues that were going on. Its just the deliberation of the data was not public. So it can be done, and I thought that particular incident was extremely fair.

So basically, you just want a response regardless of whether or not anything is being resolved to your liking?

Would be nice. Several times I have complained nothing has been even mentioned about my complaint.

I don't have any other recourse either, not that I was going to take it further anyway. Hatchets buried and all that.

edit: the most important thing in public relations is keeping the public "in the know" about whats going on, even if its nothing. Silence and/or dismissal on a subject makes people think its being ignored…

HK - I certainly do. If I take the time to submit my opinion on something I want to hear back. Think of it as a company you have submitted your resume too sending you one of those "While you are an excellent candidate" letters.

Fair enough :p

I think that clears up a bit of misconception I had about your position on this all. Thanks :)

This is a case where the charity principle would have worked well: assuming that flumpy is at least slightly intelligent (a fair assumption, ne? :tongue:) he probably wasn't talking about complaints as silly as "zomg when my HP go to 0 I die sux0rz" nor was he saying that the admins have to do everything he asks them to do. :smile:

I don't think this is an unfair thing to want at all. Comparing a player griping about a mud system is not quite analogous to this situation. We're not trying to make the game easier or more convenient, we're trying to make sure that the site administrators are going to promise to be decent human beings.

It's the users I'm worried about.

Yeah, especially those thread derailment specialists. Man… :rolleyes:

(edit to add quotation)

It wasn't just this thread in which I was referencing. I've seen numerous instances of Flumpy indicating he wasn't being listened to because he PMed the Admins and nothing was done about it. I personally see a distinction between "nothing was done about it" and "I didn't get a response." Of course, those aren't verbatim, but what I got from what he was saying in earlier incidences was "Well, I PMed you about it, how come nothing changed?" He was coming across quite strongly like he expected, just because he sent a PM, action to be taken that would lead to the outcome he was seeking, which clearly can not always be the case. So no, in both instances (my metaphor and the way he was coming across previously) it seemed as though both would basically have a complaint with the way something was working and expected, just because they complained about it, for it to be changed in the way they would prefer it to be. I can only judge his intentions by his words, and his words were quite strongly indicating what I was led to believe, and considering I've seen some players come into my game and complain about a system or write an idea note about something, and later rant and rave that what they posted didn't get implemented, its not really a stretch to think if someone is strongly coming across in that way, that they aren't in fact meaning that.

I have since gotten clarification from him that this was not the way he was intending to come across, so misunderstanding solved, no real need to try to continue hammering on this.

Couldn't we just hope that everyone here promises to be decent human beings? :)

I was going to say that, but somehow in my writing that, I'd compared you to a crazy Nam vet. So I decided not to :P

I agree with this more strongly than what I said, actually. The only difference is if the admins aren't interested in policing themselves, there's no way to make sure they follow through with their end of the bargain. "Who watches the watchmen?" and all that.

The people willing to take a suspension[albeit temporary of late] to be heard.

I think Runter just became the Patron Saint of Thread Martyrs.

You could follow that into an endless regression of "who watches the watchers watching the watchers of the watchmen" though. At some point there has to be an end to it. Someone somewhere will end up having to put their foot down and no matter how decently it's done, someone will always object. It is impossible to please everyone. So in the end we will have to go with what we see pleasing enough people to be acceptable. And so far it seems the original proposal is fitting that bill.

Again I disagree. If there is no hierarchy as such, it is unnecessary to watch the watchmen as everyone is a watchman to some degree or another.

But you've already stated your dislike for this sort of thing.