Opinions needed for site improvement.

I plan to add a full post tomorrow, but I will state that I agree with majority, if not all, of what is written here. It is definitely something that may become a sensitive topic, but its something that should be made more aware of, especially to the writers who visit here daily and perhaps have similar thoughts in the backs of their minds. I will add on that you do make good points and, while there may be more, it is definitely a good start for a continued conversation involving similar as well as exact topics involving what you have pointed out. I hope more will jump on and put forth their opinions.

I have to say, I have some very mixed feelings about some of the points raised so far. Some of them I have strong opinions on, some of them, I really couldn't care less for. So just be aware, this post is going to feel a bit all over the place. So let us begin:

Regardless of how anyone feel about this, I want to be the first to say that the word 'glory days' is a very loose, baseless term to use around here. for some, 'glory days' refers to the utter crap that was FB, and honestly, despite the small moments of enjoyment i got, it was a piece of shit. There I said it, and I am unapologetic for saying it as well. I also don't mean to be a downer, but if you also intend to refer to the 'glory days' as some of the early moments or a good portion of 1.5, then I also won't bear you any good will either, cause they happened and now are gone.
To be more clear, I'm sick of this talk about going back to the supposed 'glory days', the past is the past, you want to live in it, that's your choice. But if you want the site to progress, stop trying to take us back to points in time that already happened. The only way to progress is to keep moving forward. We need new ideas, not old ones. We have become a small site, and what worked when we had people pouring in every month, wont work now.

Now to move on to the first of Gabe's points. Having worked on the PGC, the GRPEC before it, and the GEC before that, I learned a lot of things. One of the things that irks me more than anything, is someone going "I did not and still do not approve" of decisions that were made. honestly though, there was a lot of things wrong with some of the systems we changed. The only thing that negatively affected the site, was misconceptions that certain groups had, and the fact they were too busy vocally opposing change, instead of helping shape the system. With a site like JvS, change happens, it's inevitable, but sitting around, like a lot of people were, and saying "but we want the shitty old system back" will lead no where. As I said, the past is in the past, it happened, problems were found, they were fixed.
Nate, i gotta ask though, you always demand transparency from the Whills and PGC, but you never really explain what you mean. During my time with the PGC, discussion (at least until recently) and accountability were always important topics. But at the same time, it is unfair to expect the Council to be accountable, and not expect the Council to expect Player's to also be accountable. It is why the TAB was created, it was why the Economic system was changed. These things meant their running was out in the open, they were transparent systems (or at least the TAB was meant to be), so consider carefully what you mean by transparency, and be sure to explain it, instead of tossing the word transparency about like it is going out of fashion.
I will say this though, the PGC, as it is, really needs to change. As is, there is no Leadership for the rest of the Council, and honest discussions between the HC's and Councillors is slowly fading into oblivion. I hate to admit it, but the Council has become a cadre of friends who were ascended to their positions (bar a couple exceptions), and now they cover each other to retain their positions. I really think, for JvS to move forward, that the PGC needs an overhaul, the current HCs are too content with where they are, to risk decisions and make plans for keeping JvS afloat. Because, I can tell you now, as far as the PGC is concerned, there is nothing as far as plans go. We need people who are willing to take risks, people who want to get things moving, because sitting around and lazing it by will only lead to people losing interest.

You know, I also think we need some more Whills. Daz is awesome and all, but there is only soo much he can do. RL will always be more important than JvS, and anyone who says otherwise should be stabbed with a rusty spork. That said though, JvS still needs admins with the power and know-how that are able to be active, so we can keep improving the site. Otherwise, there is not much point in us working out a plan to draw more people here, if we don't have a team of Admins who can help implement it.

On the point of decreasing the number of planet's we have to give the illusion of more activity, the only problem is, that an illusion is just that, an illusion. I mean, I have heard some workable systems suggested with regards to how we would go about archiving some planets, which I will let their idea owners, explain. But, at the same time, forcing people to write together won't work. There are just some people who don't get along OOC, and forcing them to write together will end a lot worse. You know what else, I quite enjoy sometimes just finding a nice quite little underused planet, and blocking myself out from having to interact with other people. It's not the greatest mindsite, but hey, dealing with people constantly isn't everyone's cup of tea.


JvS is a team, from the Whills, to the PGC, right down to each Author/Writer/Player. In fact, we are all one and the same, regardless of whether or not you have a badge or a Whilldom. We are all bound by our love of Star Wars and the fact we write on JvS. It's about time we all realised this and stopped pointing fingers.
If you're not happy with a decision being made, first consider why you are not happy with it, then present some counter points and suggest an alternative that isn't something that was already done. Hell, try and get to know your fellow Authors/Writers/Players who have been named as Councillors, find out their opinion, and share your own opinion in a constructive way. Don't just throw a bone out and expect someone else to work it all out, or expect them to just go "fine let's go back to something we did once before".
If we are honest about moving forward, then we need to be prepared to not try and bring back the past.

PGC members are appointed by application. You apply and, as long as you're not a complete tool, you'll usually be accepted.

HCs are selected when a current HC retires. I know the idea of some sort of grand conspiracy has always been popular, but it's really quite simple: the new guy is the least incompetent out of the current crop of Councilors. Oddly enough, Becca here would have been an HC a few months back, if not for a spectacularly stupid move that knocked him from the running.

The Whills choose someone to replace them when they go. How that decision is made has always been a mystery, even to me. I tried to pick someone who I was reasonably certain could do the damn thing, but everyone had their own ideas for what that meant.

As far as a daily conversation goes, what's the fucking point? They don't even talk among themselves on a weekly basis, much less daily. There's always the Consult the Councilor thread, but again, what's the fucking point? It's not like there's some high-level, site changing shit going on right now. Or at any time in the past year, really. Woohoo, they brought the PO back, slapped a new name on it, and decided to crowdsource the work. Hot damn, you can register your business again. It's the same old shit in the same old way. Meanwhile, it's usually one person doing all the BS admin work until they either burn out or become disillusioned and do something stupid. Once that happens, the Council goes dead until the next bright and shiny face steps up to get their dick pounded flat. Same story with the Whills.

Not happy with some of the changes that have occurred back when that sort of thing happened every now and again? Cool. Stand in line. The only people that liked them are gone, and you've got a better chance of making sweet, sweet love to a blender than starting any sort of concerted effort to change things back. Why, you ask? For starters, for all this talk of change and accountability and transparency, you people suck at coming up with actual, workable plans. Even when someone comes up with a plan that they think is great, everyone is going to tear it down and pick its bones. It may have been a great plan or it may have been a shitty one. Doesn't matter. If it's not their plan, they don't want to back it. Hell, that's why getting anything done with the limited selection of assholes available in the Council is damned near impossible. Anyone want to take bets on how much of a clusterfuck it would be if the decision making process was open to every swinging dick with an opinion and entitlement issues?

So, if you really want to get this random-ass list of gripes and complaints acted upon, here's my advice. Take any points that involve a conspiracy among the Council and/or Whills and throw it out the door. They're far too apathetic or incompetent (results may vary) to pull off a conspiracy, and wasting time on it is almost as pointless as buying condoms for the Pope. Then, take your remaining points and come up with actionable plans for getting them implemented. You'll need to break them down Barney style, with step by step instructions. Finally, put in an application to become a Councilor, because that's the group with the power to make this happen, and most of them couldn't give less of a shit about the site if you were to surgically remove their collective colon and sew their collective asshole shut. If they did, they might at least have the courtesy to log in once every month or so.

...........

I have known you for a long while, Nate. But never have you touched a nerve with me, but this, this is some seriously slanderous bullshit. While I don't agree with the base of your argument, I will nod my head to your points - valid or otherwise. Your opinion is as valid as anyone's on this site - past, present, or future... but that's where the niceties from me stop, and the otherwise levelheaded person people know on this site goes the fuck out the window.

Much like Era, when I speak my mind I don't sugarcoat, or prance around. I get to the fucking point, and sometimes harshly and bluntly so. So, if readers are going to get seriously buttsore by constant swearing, use of poor punctuation, and probably a rant or two, just skip the fuck over me, savvy?

That was my disclaimer, by the way.

Onto the show.

*Facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm, facepalm...*

Jul 25, 2014 1:09:32 GMT -8 @prarrebeccaelios said:

Nate, i gotta ask though, you always demand transparency from the Whills and PGC, but you never really explain what you mean. During my time with the PGC, discussion (at least until recently) and accountability were always important topics. But at the same time, it is unfair to expect the Council to be accountable, and not expect the Council to expect Player's to also be accountable. It is why the TAB was created, it was why the Economic system was changed. These things meant their running was out in the open, they were transparent systems (or at least the TAB was meant to be), so consider carefully what you mean by transparency, and be sure to explain it, instead of tossing the word transparency about like it is going out of fashion.

Well, golly, seems former PGC members - including myself, are all in agreement on something. You want in, fill out a fucking application. You want to change something, fill out a fucking application. You want to bitch about how the site's run, get in fucking line with the rest of daydreamers, and reminisces.

There is no "elite" cadre of inner circle friends plotting to undermine the site and bend it to their devious wills. If that were the case, I'd never have been picked to be a councilor, or elevated to HC. For the good part of 7 years I denied positions on the site, because I didn't want to get wrapped up in the politics of bullshit rules, and whiny bitches. But, when the new site went up, I through my hat in, not because I was rubbing elbows with the current "elite", but because - for the first time - I thought I could actually make a difference for the site. Do you know who's actually on the Council, or better yet - who your Whills are? They're seasoned veterans of this site; much like yourself, seasoned writers and RPers, they are the ones that have helped shape it and drive it forward... And you have the gual to point a finger and say "you don't know what you're doing, and you're a bunch of circle-jerking sycophants." Well, fuck yourself! Seriously, bend over and do it, because that's the most asinine, ignorant statement yet, and I've only just started to tear you a new one.

Seriously, pull a Buffalo Bill, and tuck it back and try, I'll wait.

You want to know the reason I left the Council, huh? The reason why I stepped down, and for lack of a better word, have been lurking in the corners and shaking my head? Because dealing with asshats wasn't my forte. Sure, a constructive argument is awesome, even inviting... but dealing with a myopic view of a subject only brings out the murder.death.kill in me. I left because there was no need of my services, there was no need for my insight, and there was no one listening anyways. Does that sound like a group of site running circle-jerkers to you? No, I didn't think so. They're all human, all writers, all crazy for Star Wars, and of course for this site/outlet. But being human means they're fallible, and that unlike the Borg, makes use opinionated - and sometimes drastically so. It takes a very special person(s) to fill the shoes you're shitting in. It takes someone with experience, gumption, and know how. It also takes patients and when needed discretion. and lastly a coolness in ascertaining a situations, and being PC about it...even if the other person is a total used tampon.

So, if you think you have what it takes, sign up. If you want to make your voice more than heard, sign up. Until that point, there shouldn't be any noise from the peanut gallery. 

Well, at least we agree on something. I'm glad I get to give your other end a break for at least one bullet mark.
 
The renewence of the PO and the emergence of a rules-system hauntingly similar to 1.5 was my biggest peeve, and main soap box for me as a Councilor and HC. I fucking hate, HATED the PO. Now, that - in my opinion - was the biggest source of headaches in the past. So, why the fuck would we want it again? With the new site, and a clean slate, and the lack of trolls and such. Why the fuck would be want to go back and allow for people to troll around?
*sighs*
In short, I agree, Nate. The rules, or mid-stream/work-in-progresses are not needed. What's needed from the Council is creative ideas for the community (Thanks Era, Sin, Dav, Corr, Daz, Narti, Becca, Alphi). To build it up, and add momentum and interest back into the site. And when the time comes (if ever) that we have the membership that needs a rule here or there, then, and only then, should something as unessential as the PO be considered for reopening.

Which leads me into , point #3...
Yes, there is a problem with decreasing membership and RPing, and it's essentially two pronged.
1) RL, the "backbone writers" as you so eloquently put it, are, well, 7 years older than they were when they first started... putting most in the age bracket of late-20's to mid-30's. It's this time in life most people find a soul-sucking job, continue in schools of higher and higher learning, settle down and pop out a few kids, or - and this is a big one - just lose interest all together (drama).
2)See example above...

Look, I'm totally on the boat for getting new people in on here. I'm totally down for whoever has the time and initiative to post on other sites, broadcasting this site. You seriously have my props, blessings, and tippings of my hat in acknowledgement. But until this site is actually one big happy family again, that ain't going to happen, and by happen I mean - people sticking around. And new people coming in are more than likely seeing the tumble weeds blowing around, and the discontent of the locals. Wouldn't that turn you off to an RPing site? I know I wouldn't want to write with a bunch of fatheaded pre-madonnas, or be stuck on a planet - where others are posting - yet ignoring me completely.

As a collaborative writing site, collaborating is the key word here kiddies. We need to toss OOC drama aside. Do you want to write? Do you want to have so much happy fun time that your fingers catch on fire and your brain explodes? Well, write... Write with your OOC enemy, have a romp in the JotW's, take a new character or writer under your wing... Do anything but bicker and stay in your isolationistic shells. That's going to be the key in bringing back the site's moral, the momentum, and possibly the interest by non-JvSer's.
Wrong, as Becca said...

Jul 25, 2014 1:09:32 GMT -8 @prarrebeccaelios said:

On the point of decreasing the number of planet's we have to give the illusion of more activity, the only problem is, that an illusion is just that, an illusion. I mean, I have heard some workable systems suggested with regards to how we would go about archiving some planets, which I will let their idea owners, explain. But, at the same time, forcing people to write together won't work. There are just some people who don't get along OOC, and forcing them to write together will end a lot worse. You know what else, I quite enjoy sometimes just finding a nice quite little underused planet, and blocking myself out from having to interact with other people. It's not the greatest mindsite, but hey, dealing with people constantly isn't everyone's cup of tea.

Well, minus the "forcing to RP together part"... Though, I do want more of a live and let live mentality IC.

Ok, 5 thru 7, basically take me back to the top. with the ass reaming. But, I'll alot you this...

The Council, and HCs are not needed. There is no need for them to be in the limelight if there's nothing drastically wrong to discuss - RPwise. The points of membership lose, and reinvigorating the site have droned on and on and on for a year, over a year. We're tired. Tired of the nitpicking and calls back to the "good times", or the "golden age of JvS". It's dead, it died, deal with that. Deal with the truth that the site was at it's peak, and fried in an instant. Deal with the fact that things can't be as they were, and we're better off that way. That was then, this is now... So, get with the now part, take off your training wheels, and get going.

The Council and HC is transparent, so transparent in fact - that you have no clue how we've melded into the background. and that's where we should be, and stay until needed. Much like the Whills, we're not here to fucking hold hands or slap wrists (though, we have to ad nauseam). No, we're here to help gently push you guys along, and to teach you to share, and be nice, and say "thanks you". Honestly being an admin on this site is like being a parent. You hope for the best, you teach and nurture and mold, but, it's up to the kid/RPer to take what they've been given and run with it. It doesn't fall on the PGC, HC, or Whills to shoulder the entire responsibility for idiocy. No, we're here to curtail it, and stamp it out when it does come up, and truth be told it's the RPer's responsibility to police their own people, and when that doesn't work - then come to the higher ups.

There's no hand holding. Learn to fly, or fuck off.

Oh, and on a side note... "New Player's Guild". Not bad, not bad at all. Now, that's something to run with, and nurture into something close to a peer-mentoring group for the site. I like that thought, and that premise.

Also a subject that I personally was working on before I left the PGC/HC... And, now that you've brought it up, I'll put some time into again.

Ok, in closing, It's ok to not like the site, or how things have been for a year. Fine, that's your shtick, your opinion, and your burden to bare. But bashing the people that HAVE been doing their damnedest to keep thus withering husk on the golden throne alive. Well, that's just backasswards... Constructive criticism is a occupational hazard for us Admins, but it's one that can be dealt with respectfully. Saying that we're the problem for the site, and having the vaguest of proof, well, that's just shoddy, biased, and ignorant towards people who aren't even paid to put up with 99.9% of the bullshit that has befallen the site since it's reactivation last April.

Thoughts for another time, I suppose.

If I may speak on behalf of the Council.

The reason the PGC has seemed "silent" or "inactive" is twofold: Firstly, our current Councilor group is small, and also varying degrees of inactive, something I'm investigating right now. Secondly, there just hasn't been anything that requires our attention. If I can provide some perspective on myself, as a forum staff (meaning elsewhere, not just on JvS) I've always tended to take a more "hands-off" approach, not to the point I never do anything, but because I like to encourage the "younger" staff to be active and tackle things, get experience under their belts. And as for regards to the TAB, being an open community project, I was hoping to see a lot more community involvement, peers looking over and poking at applications. Couple that with the fact that many of the applications feature really intense stats that go over many heads, mine included, it becomes a daunting task to tackle.

But that's a different topic.

When people say the Council needs help, they're right, but perhaps not to the extreme extent that has been mentioned. Where others have suggested signing up for the PGC if they want to a chance to get behind the scenes and work on policies, I highly endorse that idea, because we could use the hands. Applications are always open, and we hire based on necessity; right now, there's a high necessity. You want to get a taste of the behind-the-scenes work? Want a chance to aid in shaping the site and its policies? Or even just want to be RP guidance? By all means, do sign up.

As for the points brought up in the original post, much of what I'd say has already been said, so I won't really bother to reiterate much of it.

A New Players' Guide like we used to have would be handy, especially if it can be sent as an automated message, but if not, I know we used to have a group of people who handled stuff like that and sent PMs to new players with that information and welcoming to the site, we could potentially have people revive that group.

Regarding archiving planets, I still am not for, at least not to a major extent. Maybe a small handful could go, but otherwise I like the space and the options, and agree with what was said earlier that no one should ever be forced to write together; that's initiative people need to take up on their own, but it's something Jud touched on nicely.

Finding ways to attract new people is always nice, but as has also been said, we need to find ways to keep them here, not just attract them. We need to create the perfect, welcoming environment that will not only draw them in, but make them stay here; advertising alone won't do the job.

That's all I want to say right now.

My problem with this is that just because someone's a faction leader or higher up doesn't make them fit to be in charge of something like the PGC. In fact, I'm not comfortable with it even if it's just an "official SL directing" group, because what's stopping major players from subtly manipulating the flow of the site to suit their own ends if the other leaders aren't picking up on it? And if they are picked up on, no one really has any right to throw them out of their own faction. A system like this would probably just take too much restructuring and regulations, something we don't need more of to be honest. Honestly, I say leave the SLs to the players, though there's nothing saying that players who happen to be Councilors (or Whills in disguise) can't also take initiative in trying to come up with SLs. People have to be interested in an SL to begin with, so let the userbase collaborate on these things, don't hand them over to a Council.

Regarding your "Tutorial Island" idea, it sounds like the old "New Players Forum" on 1.5, which seemed to get some modest usage. It's something that might be worth trying out, even if it doesn't get much use; assign a group of players to it, or just let anyone reply to new players to test their skills and judge where they might fit in best, either way. It's something I'm not necessarily sure would be successful, per se, but it's something I wouldn't mind seeing put into a trial period or something.

Once again we're back to the irrefutable fact that not everyone who throws together a faction is suited for leadership outside of their little circle. And hell, not everyone who throws together a faction wants a wider leadership role. What does it tell you when, out of all the people on the site, only a small percentage have ever volunteered to be councilors, and of the ones that have, an inordinate amount have been useless fucktards who tried to game the system to their advantage and got booted out for it. Bad enough that they spend their free time going on about how they were wronged and how the leadership is incompetent, and now you want to let them have another go?

The idea isn't completely without merit. It very well may have worked on other sites, but as has been pointed out time and time again, we're not other sites. This place is anarchy compared to most other Star Wars websites, and you know what? That works for us. We don't screen characters, we let folks get away with all kinds of shit that would be a no go pretty much anywhere else, and even permanently banned assholes are let back in to continue their assholery once more. As a result, there are quite a few people on here that I wouldn't trust to lead an orgy in a whorehouse, much less have a say in anything of any importance.

BUMP

I like this idea of the Tutorial Island. Like a brief training run for new writers. I haven't played the game in years, but it reminds me of the tutorial missions you have to run with Runescape, learning how to gather materials and craft things, etc, only these would cover things like posting etiquette, rules of the site, tips and tricks, and so on.

On another note, I have indeed read each of the posts here, and can't help but notice a couple things regarding the environment on this site. As Eralam said, "We're not other sites." Of course, he's right in this. Not only in the obvious technical sense, but also in the sense that our writers think and function differently from those on other sites.
That being said, the idea that because we are "different from them" that their ideas are not worth considering for use, reconfiguring for use, or putting into use, here on JvS, is a falsehood, at best.
It may sound appealing that "anarchy works for us," but I've never observed that sentiment succeed in any context during any point in human history, ever. There's a reason why other sites are not having this very sort of conversation for the umpteenth time: The way in which they operate obviously plays a part in their success. A huge one. I would argue that how you go about doing things is almost entirely responsible for your success or failure.
Hopefully, I'm pointing out the obvious here, but I do so with sincerity.

There are two primary types of people we can see join our site: People new to the text-based RP community, and those who have previous experience in it.
The former are likely to come to JvS with little idea of how things work (pointing out the obvious), the latter are likely to come to JvS with an particular perspective and set of expectations of how things are to function (again, pointing out the obvious).
What may not be so obvious is the idea that writers new to the genre will not continue with us long if they see how chaotic and anarchical our environment really is, and veterans to the genre will quickly move on to something else (or go back to old haunts) when they realize the same.
In other words: What people are looking for typically is stability and reliability. Consistency. I don't mean that we post in a timely manner without extensive, unexplained absences that go on for months at a time.
What I mean is that the environment we generate is consistent, and reliable. That we are not constantly in a state of upheaval, or always seeking to fix problems that may or may not be worth the time it takes to set up a dedicated thread for it all, start a site-wide poll, or allow for months of discussion on something that will yield no fruit to begin with.

On a similar topic, the manner in which we discuss things is similarly anarchical and chaotic. It can also be pointlessly intimidating and aggressive. I only use you Eralam, because you're an example that's only a half-scroll away: "Not happy with some of the changes that have occurred back when that sort of thing happened every now and again? Cool. Stand in line. The only people that liked them are gone, and you've got a better chance of making sweet, sweet love to a blender than starting any sort of concerted effort to change things back. Why, you ask? For starters, for all this talk of change and accountability and transparency, you people suck at coming up with actual, workable plans."
This is a particularly negative way to present a legitimate point (and a point I happen to sympathize with). But your ideas mean nothing to others when they're shrouded in such a way. People will discredit your position or revoke it entirely because of how you choose to present yourself.

Another: "Finally, put in an application to become a Councilor, because that's the group with the power to make this happen, and most of them couldn't give less of a shit about the site if you were to surgically remove their collective colon and sew their collective asshole shut. If they did, they might at least have the courtesy to log in once every month or so."

The manner of speak here is clever, true, but suffers the same effects as the previous example. Eralam's words here give to potential members the impression that what he is saying is entirely true, across the board. Meaning there's little to no hope that anything positive could come out of the original idea or suggestion. It tells people "This place is already broken, why else would this individual be speaking so harshly?" Of course Eralam may come from a background that fostered this manner of speaking, a background in which it is perfectly normal. But others may have not, and so seeing such extremism posted on the public boards can be a shock. I've had to learn the same lesson, and for the longest time I held the position of "It only matters -what- I say, not how I say it. People should look passed my words and focus solely on the meaning."
That was always a selfish and inconsiderate attitude of mine, one I've been working to dissolve. Depending on who you're talking to, how you say something can be very important, and I think we should remember that.

I understand that it's a great feeling to be able to put down your words the same manner in which you'd speak them aloud, but I also understand the reaction it draws from people when they're approached in such a way. Of course, Eralam, you are not the poster-boy for this way of speaking, this is only an example so people understand what I'm describing.
But the point is is that when potential members see a wall of text that exhibits such negativity and aggressiveness, it does not create the feeling of support, community and cooperation that we're supposed to be about.
The irony of my own words is not lost on me, considering my past, but the past is the past for a reason; it's been resolved and buried.

It may sound silly, but perhaps we should institute a ban on vulgar and "inappropriate" language on the public boards, i.e. OOC swear words, sexually charged discussion, etc. Chat, private boards, and IC writing, that's fine. But public OOC discussion should be free of it, so that no one participating in a conversation (especially one surrounding a topic that might grow heated) ends up feeling as if the conversational environment has grown blatantly hostile.
I would not suggest bans on accounts or anything be instituted in the case of such a breach in conduct, but locking that individual from the thread in question could be easily put in place.
I'm a military man, and speak as dirty as they come more often than not, but even I've realized the value of polite and tactful conversation over the last many years. It has merit, and value to our community. Of course, there are likely as many counter-arguments to this suggestion as there are atoms in a basketball, but the simple fact of the matter is OOC discussion ought to be professional and polite anyways, to present the best OOC image to potential members, as well as to promote a healthier conversational atmosphere amongst ourselves.

I want to reiterate again that I in no way mean Eralam is an extremist, or that his views or opinions are any less valid because of how he chooses to present them. I merely needed a way to present my thoughts clearly, so they could not be misconstrued or misinterpreted. I hope I've done well enough in that.


On another note: Perhaps increasing the number of people placed on the site council would help as well to lighten the burden on the rest.