Somewhere in this thread it explains that some of the imms just don't post here because of the maligned attitude. This guy is one of those bad eggs. To put it into perspective, here is someone who is an expert on everything regarding a subject, but has never spent any time studying the subject from the expert manuals. All he has done is come to his own conclusions based upon assumptions he is making from an uneducated side. Would you listen to a person who is giving you medical advice because he saw it on an episode of ER, or would you rather talk to the doctor who has been trained to give you the advice?

Long before I became an immortal, I was one of the guys doing the leading into hell. Considering that I was leading folks like Graatch, Challen, Chris Warren and a few others, I have a pretty good idea that there weren't any imms with us. And if you go to Scarab's page, I was in the group that first killed Dispater and made it to the 6th Circle of Hell. My hanging out buddies and my characters included guys like Admiral, Juggernaut, Santa, Able, Killmore and quite a few others. Yes, I was one of YOU! I still am. The difference is that I wanted to give back to the game. I wanted to see for myself if what some of these players who seemed to know everything was true or not. I learned long ago that if you want to have a valid opinion, know what you are talking about first. I went in with an open mind so that I could form my own opinions on who was doing what. That was three years ago. I am in the know now. I have seen behind the green curtain. I have read the books and learned what this game is about. After three years, my opinion is this: CF is the best mud in the world because of the staff and the players. But, if you think that a few bad apples who are not in the know, have not been behind the green curtain and have not read the books are the ones you should believe, then you are going to be frustrated playing it.



>This was posted by Graham on Dio's and I thought it should be
>read here as well. He cannot post it for some reason. Anyway,
>this does not necessarily reflect my opinions
>
>I'll state the broader issue more clearly: When I think of
>issues that legitimately threaten CF's longevity, the number
>one issue by a wide margin is staff burnout. The game requires
>a tremendous amount of energy to maintain and improve, and I'm
>absolutely convinced that if all staff were hitting on all
>cylinders all the time, every other problem would disappear
>with a quickness.
>---------------
>Perhaps you should stop all the work on non-value add work
>that is a boon to the most anal of players and a complete
>turn-off to the more average players.
>ie.Wands, preps etc.

All of the work done is a value-add. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it isn't there.
>------------------
>Others just want recognition or notoriety, and aren't willing
>or able to generate it through exceptional play, so they
>resort to childish, short-sighted behavior, like spreading
>rumors (true or false, doesn't seem to matter), spamming, or
>trolling.
>------------------
>Your attempts to constantly malign players who speak the
>truth, just one you dislike is truly galling. It's like
>calling people "unpatriotic" for disagreeing with you. Rumours
>aren't rumours if they are true.

The only players who are constantly maligned are those who are experts of everything they know nothing about.
>-------------------
>The real shame is that the players we love, those who generate
>a positive experience for themselves, the staff, and the other
>players tend to get pummeled on the forums.
>-------------------
>Speak up, defend them - a positive experience for themselves
>and others doesn't just have to be about agreeing with you.
>People do disagree with you for the good of the game. Please,
>someday, realise that.

Things are done by committee. When you point a finger at Valg, you are pretty much pointing it at the entire staff. And from reading posts from you and people like you, let me be one to say, you really don't have a clue.
>--------------------
>How many imms do we have? How many routinely involve
>themselves in public discussions?
>
> It's not a time issue for many people- I hear from nearly
>every member of the staff through more private channels on a
>regular basis.)
>
>So why do you ban/discourage imms from talking on the likes of
>dioxides if you have such support for free flowing discussion.
>No, you'd rather have any discussion in your court where you
>can delete each and every message you fear. That's why we'll
>never have public discussion.
That is simple. We aren't going to be dragged into a conversation with some of the silly posts that occur there.