>That's negative, whether its true or not or whether you
>*agree* with it or not its certainly not a positive post. You
>can call it positive, you can call it a pink rose or a flying
>car but that does not make it so. This was not about people
>dealing with other players and the Imms protecting those
>helpless players from other players. This was about Imms
>dealing with people criticizing *them*.

An analogy can be put to a number of purposes. I'm not sure that I've read the post you're referring to, but let's say it's negative in that case. That doesn't mean the analogy in general is negative.

I do have more negative metaphors on this topic. I try to keep them to myself.

>The fact that we can't agree on that is a good indication of
>my frustration with you guys. It is like you're from a
>different planet. Literally. Like you claim on one hand to
>hate drama, yet on the other repeatedly do things that you
>know cause drama. I think you're sharp, so I have to believe
>it isn't that you don't understand these things but that you
>do understand them and choose to ignore/lie about them because
>you enjoy drama like this.

I think you're trying to reduce a complex situation too far -- trying to simplify it to a point wherein it no longer resembles the original situation enough to be instructive.

For example, sure, I create drama by posting to the forums.

(Of course, I can also see that I create drama by NOT posting to the forums, such as during the about previous two weeks before tonight in which I wasn't reading and posting and it looks like Torak bumped a post you made demanding a response again and again and again. Can I win there? I submit to you that I can't.)

Does posting to the forums mean that I'm drama-seeking? I don't think it does. I view it as something I do that yields other benefits that I think are important enough that I'm willing to accept the unwanted consequence of drama to get them. Clearly you see that calculus differently.