>>"I think that the whole argument that following a god
>>automatically gets you piles of imm xp is not exactly valid
>in
>>all cases. Yes, in a lot of cases it is. Partially because
>>most characters who follow a god tend to have a higher level
>>of RP than a lot of characters who do not follow a god.
>>Whether that is a fault of ours (as the imms) or a fault of
>>the players is hard to say."
>>
>>It doesn't matter who is to blame, that's not the point.
>The
>>point is we're trying to help and we're met with "bu-bye."
>
>You were met with honest answers and well said explanations.
>At some point "nuh uh, you" "nuh uh, you" one party must say
>"ok, im done." If you don't like the expalantion, it doesn't
>mean the other reasoning is wrong. We certainly don't need any
>more chiefs either, so deal with it.

Honest answers and well said explanations? Where? The same "no" repeated in slightly different words doesn't cut it.

>
>
>>"Maybe its cause I'm still fairly new as an imm, but I don't
>>think anyone has ever said that there is no reason for
>>complaints. What I can say though is that in most instances
>we
>> the staff) take a very calm and collected stance in our
>>responses to you (the players) and we are often met with
>hate
>>for it. Is our system perfect? Nope, but I think that it
>works
>>far better than most people give us credit for."
>>
>>Like I said, nobody says it, but many acts as though the
>>players are out of line for complaining. It's what is not
>>said, it's the questions that are not answered, and it's the
>>attitude we meet. Not everyone who argues with someone on
>the
>>immstaff hates them, but we often feel hated from square one.
>
>>If someone argues with the immstaff they had better come
>>waving a white flag with their tail between their legs and
>had
>>better be ready to get their nose brown. Otherwise they're
>>likely to be dismissed or worse punished. Not always, but
>>very likely.
>
>There are plenty of examples on these very boards and even
>THIS thread of cool-headed people discussing a topic with
>civility. I argue with immortals the same way I argue with any
>of the players. I don't feel like any of them hate me. If you
>feel like they hate you, I'd guess you're imagining things or
>you're a ####ing cheater. I've never been dismissed or
>punished. Aside from losing newbie channel privileges because
>some immortal is jealous of my cleverness.

Good for you. Everyone else, is not you.

>
>>"Your response to me is a perfect example of it. Does it
>>actually accomplish anything when you take a potshot at me
> or
>>the rest of the staff) when I am attempting to have a
>dialogue
>>with people over an issue? When we constantly have cries
>from
>>our players that they want to be treated fair, I think that
>>its only reasonable to ask that we (as the staff) are also
>>treated fairly."
>>
>>If anything, my response was returning fire to your potshot
>at
>>Sarien. It was clear what he said. A response of sarcasm
>and
>>nothing more is hardly attempting to have a civil dialogue.
>>It goes both ways.
>
>It was quite clear what he said. His tone was not however. I
>too read his tone as escalating anger, though so too did I
>read Umiron's as such. I suspect neither really meant to
>insult the other's sensibilities intentionally. I also
>understand Umiron may have misread him slightly (god forbid,
>holy mother of god protect me from someone misreading my
>post!) You would THINK that a bunch of nerds who play a text
>based game would understand how and when this sort of thing
>happens.
>

Yes, it was quite clear what he said, whether or not he had a tone of anger is irrelevant. There is no misreading. A sarcastic response did not help, it did the opposite.