I'd been planning on doing this for a few days now, but RL has once again clubbed me over the head. To avoid any confusion, I'm not an admin here, just a member of the RPC community and head of one of the linkshells which comprises it. Regardless, just a few comments... I still intend to stay out of sharing opinions myself, as I think I've done more than enough in my original posts, but I do wish to say a few things about the thread and discussion thus far, as well as attempt to clarify the thought and intent behind my initial post. Let's see if I can keep it brief! (I probably can't.)
First off, I'd like to ask that posters be a bit more mindful of how they come across. Tone is huge - people often listen more to method than message! If we don't approach this from a mindset of "How can we all play along, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree)", we're not going to even get out the starter gate. That's part of why I proposed a minimalist approach - less for people to disagree with!
I didn't post what I did so much from a perspective of "How do we refactor the RPC" but "How do we, as members of the community, change how we think and relate to each other so we can all get along and RP free of drama and misunderstanding". Any necessary changes to the RPC I believe would follow naturally as a consequence of that, if the community could reach a point of all-inclusive acceptance and understanding (or at least enough so that we aren't bickering or drawing imaginary lines). Diving straight into what to do with the RPC site itself is cart before the horse, if you ask me. Get people willing and able to freely communicate without butting heads and I think a clearer picture will emerge on its own.
That's also why I think as many voices being heard here as possible is absolutely essential. I sent PMs to each of the RPC-listed linkshell leaders with a link to this thread, asking that they inform their members, but as of this posting I haven't seen any posts regarding this... It's entirely possible I simply missed them or it went up on private portions of the forum that a visitor simply can't see, but just to be safe, after posting this I'm going to be making the rounds and posting myself to insure visibility.
Due to what will hopefully be an influx of new readers, I'd like to draft a new discussion suggestion: If you find yourself in a sharp difference of opinion with someone, rather than start a debate in the thread, try contacting them privately via /tell, PM, IM, or the like. Debates on forums often become a war of statements rather than actual communication, and the walls of text generated can discourage those trying to get a handle on the situation. Talking person-to-person changes the atmosphere and can help you refine your views, see what you agree on, and what your differences are. Then you can bring your conclusions back to the table so we can all see what you've come up with.
The apparent conflict raised in the etiquette I see as no conflict myself, just a turn of phrasing. You're allowed to discuss things and bring up relevant points that involve specific people or groups, but be clear when you do so. However, you are not permitted to abuse them for the purpose of attacks or accusations. We're here to discuss and learn, not fight.
As for the etiquette details, some of the content in the above posts have been flirting with the line between OK and not OK. Castiel's concerned about bringing down the mod-hammer on it due to some of the points raised in this very discussion and the fact that it's borderline and not blatant violation, but I'd again appeal to a spirit of "how do we work together to move ahead". Castiel and I disagree on a number of things, but the fact that this thread and this discussion continue to stand uncontested I believe is the first inkling of what I sincerely hope is a greater cooperation in the future. We don't need to agree, but we do need to get along if this ship's going to get us anywhere.
LATER EDIT:
I suppose I ought to clarify so as not to cause misunderstandings; I'm actually not referring to the points raised in the discussion itself, but rather the tone taken. Some of it is unnecessarily aggressive.
First off, I'd like to ask that posters be a bit more mindful of how they come across. Tone is huge - people often listen more to method than message! If we don't approach this from a mindset of "How can we all play along, even if we disagree (especially if we disagree)", we're not going to even get out the starter gate. That's part of why I proposed a minimalist approach - less for people to disagree with!
I didn't post what I did so much from a perspective of "How do we refactor the RPC" but "How do we, as members of the community, change how we think and relate to each other so we can all get along and RP free of drama and misunderstanding". Any necessary changes to the RPC I believe would follow naturally as a consequence of that, if the community could reach a point of all-inclusive acceptance and understanding (or at least enough so that we aren't bickering or drawing imaginary lines). Diving straight into what to do with the RPC site itself is cart before the horse, if you ask me. Get people willing and able to freely communicate without butting heads and I think a clearer picture will emerge on its own.
That's also why I think as many voices being heard here as possible is absolutely essential. I sent PMs to each of the RPC-listed linkshell leaders with a link to this thread, asking that they inform their members, but as of this posting I haven't seen any posts regarding this... It's entirely possible I simply missed them or it went up on private portions of the forum that a visitor simply can't see, but just to be safe, after posting this I'm going to be making the rounds and posting myself to insure visibility.
Due to what will hopefully be an influx of new readers, I'd like to draft a new discussion suggestion: If you find yourself in a sharp difference of opinion with someone, rather than start a debate in the thread, try contacting them privately via /tell, PM, IM, or the like. Debates on forums often become a war of statements rather than actual communication, and the walls of text generated can discourage those trying to get a handle on the situation. Talking person-to-person changes the atmosphere and can help you refine your views, see what you agree on, and what your differences are. Then you can bring your conclusions back to the table so we can all see what you've come up with.
The apparent conflict raised in the etiquette I see as no conflict myself, just a turn of phrasing. You're allowed to discuss things and bring up relevant points that involve specific people or groups, but be clear when you do so. However, you are not permitted to abuse them for the purpose of attacks or accusations. We're here to discuss and learn, not fight.
As for the etiquette details, some of the content in the above posts have been flirting with the line between OK and not OK. Castiel's concerned about bringing down the mod-hammer on it due to some of the points raised in this very discussion and the fact that it's borderline and not blatant violation, but I'd again appeal to a spirit of "how do we work together to move ahead". Castiel and I disagree on a number of things, but the fact that this thread and this discussion continue to stand uncontested I believe is the first inkling of what I sincerely hope is a greater cooperation in the future. We don't need to agree, but we do need to get along if this ship's going to get us anywhere.
LATER EDIT:
I suppose I ought to clarify so as not to cause misunderstandings; I'm actually not referring to the points raised in the discussion itself, but rather the tone taken. Some of it is unnecessarily aggressive.