DM Lobos Removal Letter (for those who requested it)

[DM Lobo]

I've said all I want to say now, I never claimed 100% innocence in this and all i wanted is what was best for the community.

I do not want to come back.

I have already told Endy I will not be returning here, ever again from this point on -- and may (very very rarely) log into Manah to say Hello, but even that is unlikely at this point.

You can all draw your own views.

This was the email sent to me for those who want to review it

DM Lobo,
This message is to inform you that you have been removed from the DM Team, effective the moment this message reaches you.

When you were reinstated, we handed out a probation and the three terms you are required to abide by, on top of the Code of Conduct:

- Run all event concepts by us first.

- Make a write-up of all of your events. The Code says you don't have to do it for tiny events, but for the time being with your probation we want you to write up everything that you run.

- Keep your events small. By "small" I mean have a limit on scope and player participants. I'd suggest 5-6 players at most.

You have eventually broken all of these terms at one point or another over the period of time from your reinstatement leading to today, as well as broken rules of the Code of Conduct and generated multiple complaints during your tenure. While it is a difficult message for you to receive, and a difficult message for us to send, these factors have left us with no choice but to remove you once again.

Below is a breakdown of events:

You were reinstated at February 25, 2017.

At March 11, we received the first complaint against you. You were implying to players to decide among themselves who should leave when the participants exceeded their limit, and you were not responding to /tells. I talked with you over it and told you to take charge and refuse excess participants as that was your responsibility as a DM, and to indicate when you are busy, or to lower the participant number even below the limit if responsiveness is an issue.

Then March 12, barely one day after, we received another complaint that you were "outing" a character/infiltrator in front of the guild seemingly without any context preceding it.

At March 21, the person who sent the complaint at March 11 followed up with another complaint that you were continuing to levy the responsibility of limiting player count to the players themselves, continued to have difficulty responding to /tells and did not give EXP, and publicly aired DMside issues in front of the players by saying that the Head DMs were "punishing" you. The last part is the most egregious as it is considered a violation of the Code of Conduct, and particularly disappointing because it displayed the manner of behavior that eventually led to your removal the first time around.


At April 2, both Dialectic and I provided feedback on your behavior on request, shown in the spoiler tag:

Hidden: show

DM Lobo,

- Have any player complaints been put in on me, if so for what and how can they be addressed?

We have received 2 recent separate player complaints regarding you (one with two parts), one of which HDM Ditto already discussed with you. The other (which has two parts) we are still investigating. In general noting these complaints, I would recommend being careful how you RP NPCs, not talking to players about your DM side discipline issues, letting players know why you are not responding to them with tells in events if they ask you something (maybe just a general message that you are busy, as some players have felt you miss their RP and tells in your events), and ensuring you recognize RP in your events with some kind of XP or minor gold reward at the end of events as some players feel they have gotten ignored in this regard in your events.

- Do you have any concerns with any of my events so far, pace, length etc... (see write ups)
- Do you have any concerns or issues you wish to address based on my performance as a DM so far?

I don't have any specific concerns at this time beyond what I said above noting player complaints. In general, I would say take into account better player RP and requests in your events while keeping them on the smaller end size wise and do not discuss your DMing discipline issues with players.

- Have you seen a level of improvement from my last time here as a - DM, if so what would you say has gotten better / worse?

I do want to commend you for taking the time to check in with us and post writeups and for keeping your events on the smaller end.

- Is there anything you would like to see me be doing more / less of as a DM?

More reacting to player initiatives in your events IC, within reason of course noting the constraints of the world and anything that should require senior or HDM approval to change. Less of what was noted above. I'd also recommend not DMing every single day on average and taking a break a couple times a week to not burn out.

****, any further comments?

**** has covered most of it, so mostly this is all I have to say:

If you have difficulty responding to players, then make it clear you are busy and maybe also tone down the amount of players in your events in the future (even below the 7). There are DMs who can handle a lot of players, and there are DMs who are more comfortable with less, and there is no shame in being one of the latter DMs, nor a sign that you are a "bad DM" if you can't juggle 30 players at once. Believe me, it's a lot more hurtful to players to be ignored by a DM in-game than to be turned down because of a player limit/they're busy/whatever.

One of the complaints was airing DM-side issues publicly, e.g. that you were being "punished" in front of players to explain the player limit. Players do not need to know that (and it is a violation of the Code of Conduct to boot), nor should they be tasked with deciding who gets to sit out of the event once the 7-player limit is reached, of which another complaint about that came up after my talk with you over Skype regarding taking charge and making that decision yourself.

Airing DMside issues and refusing to take responsibility are among the kind of behavior that led to your removal the first time (and my words towards you), so to see it happen again disappoints me. You can say that you wouldn't need to air the issues if the limit wasn't in place to begin with, but the point remains that the limit is in place, and it is your task to demonstrate personal responsibility and work within the rules that were given to you to abide by.

I am not lying when I said I will give you a second chance, and I do want to see you prove yourself a better DM after the rocky start, but despite all your hard work you are doing a far better job undermining that second chance than anything I can do or say.

April 4, we received a report that you had given a ring with +1 regeneration as a reward. This is considered a very powerful item and you did not receive HDM permission prior to giving it.

April 6, a complaint came up that you pushed an event with many players on an associate DM. Not only is this considered a breach of probation (as you are restricted to small events in both scale and participants, and the fact that you had to move it to an ADM suggests no full DM was supervising you at the time), this is not a fair action to do on the ADM as they are learning to DM, themselves, and may not be experienced with handling mass events.

Then at April 10, we received two complaints from different people. The first one raised issues about favoritism as it seemed you have been focusing your events on a select few people as of late. The second one reported that your events have been creating server instability due to the size and scope of it, and also raised concern over favoritism due to your aforementioned focusing events on a few people.

At April 14, we received a complaint over your new plot regarding the scope of the event and lore implications. On top of not consulting the team whether it would be lore-appropriate to begin with, the scope of the event is in violation of the terms of your probation requiring you to keep your events small.

At April 17, we received another complaint over the scope of your events, in this case the one involving a "Prince of Chaos" (regardless whether it is canonical or not, it is a figure major enough to warrant feedback before using, especially as an ADM). You only retconned it to a lesser demon when I called you out on it in the DM Skype chat, and you finally asked for feedback regarding a unicorn NPC two weeks after you have already been using it.

---

In the span of two months you have generated eight separate complaints from players and DMs alike. Nine if we count the same person submitting two complaints as separate instances.

You have not adhered to any of the terms of your probation despite the terms being plainly written out at the very start of your reinstatement, and that the HDMs were available to ask if there was anything that required clarification. Ignorance, or thinking that it is not a "big deal", are not valid excuses to break the terms of your probation or the Code of Conduct, or to make your own selective interpretations over the terms.

You had the resources to seek help and clarification when needed, and we gave you this second chance in the hope that you will learn to temper yourself and learn from what you did wrong the first time, work as a member of a team, and become the DM in BG that you can be. However, you chose not to utilize the resources available to you and instead resumed the pattern of behavior that led to your removal the first time around.

In the end, we have made the collective decision to end your term as a DM on BGTSCC. Despite everything, we sincerely thank you for choosing to volunteer your time and wish you the best in your future endeavors.

Best,
Ditto

And this is what I sent them

Hello admin team,

Being a bit hot headed the last time around (Edit: being a hot head I was talking about last year), I would like to believe I am a tad wiser and more mature this time around.

The last time I requested an appeal I was upset and confused, and as a result lashed out at you guys which is something I want to apologies for first and foremost. This was something I wanted to do with Endy on Skype when she joined DM chat but didn't - because - I wanted to move forward and forget everything, though I confess this was selfish I did not want to remember the chaos from last year, as I said in my app I wanted a fresh start. Once all this is over I will be approching Endy and Maecius and fully apologies, regardless of the outcome of this.

Following this formal email I am requesting a private Skype chat with the admin team with several key members who have a part in many of these complaints listed below; these people are: *****


They will be providing evidence, logs, emails and statements (if needed)

Although I did not come back onto the team perfect, I did try very hard to address all the concerns (even if I did not agree with some of them); I did take on the feedback from Maecus last year which resulted in my monthly meetings idea and my feedback thread idea. I wrote up every plot idea, even small and silly ones (as told to do so by ****) I went further and created a plot thread for DMs to look through my plots. I openly spoke about my concerns with lore and problems with the DM team, and always brought up my ideas and plots with the DM team either through Skype, game, or the forums.

I also worked hard to be part of the team, being in constant chat with other DMs and getting involved with other plots and helping the CCs with ideas. As my posts will reflect and as the team will confirm. I took what was said pretty seriously and was always open about my new ideas and plans, as was laid out in my terms.

I confess some points **** made in her email have merit -- but I do not believe many of these points hold ground. If this ban is lifted I wish to point out that I will be putting in a new term of my own:

Quote:
I will no longer be hosting events as an ADM and instead opt as a supportive role with the CCs and main DMs in their plots supplying feedback, ideas and support as needed. I will only log in outside of these terms to supply player support outside of events

This is my idea, and my term -- something I would like the HDM team to enforce as their own rule if my ban is lifted. I want to progress and develop, and because I am here typing this now I fear the above is the only way to do it.

I am too addicted to DMing. My login times will show I am (as I was last year) the most active and most colourful DM on the team - I believe this opens up the possibility to be a bigger target than someone who logs in once a week, that is why i think it is really important to see the difference between a 'complaint' and a 'concern' or even a 'question' and not brush them all under the same tree, and make this a numbers game. A few things I do want to point out before I start.

- Adms were not aware they had a "7" player limit - no email was sent to confirm it the. Main DMs were not aware of it until I brought it up to which they assumed it was only for DM Lobo. I have spoken (and have statments) of several Staff members of BG who can back up this claim.

- It was well documented by the DM team that ADMs were breaking this new 7 player limit rule, as well as the 'not logging in unsupervised rule' no action or warning was taken by the HDM team. Even though **** made it clear this was for the ADM team as well - no clear message or email was sent. Very few were aware of this rule believing it was for me only. DM **** confirmed a 2 week supervision program first before logging in; but no email was given to enforce this. This point is valid as a claim below states I was breaking the 'NO DM supervison rule' -- when the whole team was doing the same thing.

- Following my Terms **** changed the goal posts and allowed me to host for over 7 assuming a full DM was present. Again, this change was not emailed or made clear and made the whole thing more confusing for the entire DM team, where I had to clear it up with those who logged in.

- Full Dms did not enforce or take the supervision rule seriously. Most were unaware of its terms - They would ignore our DM chat request (if asked, though not always - depending on how busy they were) and go AFK without warning (again, but not always) or notice, in some cases log out while I was in middle of event.

- No enforcement was taken for ADMs logging into the server without full DMs to supervise; Full DMs were *not* made aware of this rule, and I had to point it out several times to the DM team. **** also failed to investigate or enforce this rule. No notice was given to the DM team.

The argument here is why didn't I come to you sooner? To which I say - why was this list allowed to grow so large without my consent? I arranged monthly meetings for this very reason, for feedback and to show cooperation with the HDMs. This was my idea, and I made the effort to push them forward, due to the work load of the HDM team it was agreed they would be monthly. It was unfair this content (minus the first point) was not brought to me early, and heart breaking I had to ask for it manually.

-------------------------------------------------------

At March 11, we received the first complaint against you. You were implying to players to decide among themselves who should leave when the participants exceeded their limit, and you were not responding to /tells. I talked with you over it and told you to take charge and refuse excess participants as that was your responsibility as a DM, and to indicate when you are busy, or to lower the participant number even below the limit if responsiveness is an issue.

Although I consider this to be an important problem – I have not actively broken any rules or the DM code. In regards to ignoring tells, 'ignoring' is used out of context as for the first few weeks my DM cilent was very buggy and laggy (with several crashes which I can confirm via logs and player statments). Ignoring tells is a big issue, but missing tells I feel is not. I have statments from Dms who do ignore player tells however. It is important to note I did make an effort with players who did PM me (considering the instability). Lisa was in both events of the person who put in this complaint and she feels it was a better system for the players (overall) to agree who stays and goes – and it worked, having one or two people complain, I feel does not merit this a valid point if the remaining 7 were content, as well as most of those who were dismissed. If need be, I am willing to pull up all the players involved in this event for their view. Furthermore this was not touched upon by **** in the chat, no terms were laid out for this, and I feel it is unfair to pin this as a black mark on my name.

Then March 12, barely one day after, we received another complaint that you were "outing" a character/infiltrator in front of the guild seemingly without any context preceding it.

I would like more details on this, if possible.
Edit: This issue was related to an alignment reveal from one of my NPCs which upset a player. I did not give out player plans or goals (I didn't even know there was any) however said player was encouraged to complain (I have a witness) no RP was spoiled because of this.

At March 21, the person who sent the complaint at March 11 followed up with another complaint that you were continuing to levy the responsibility of limiting player count to the players themselves, continued to have difficulty responding to /tells and did not give EXP, and publicly aired DMside issues in front of the players by saying that the Head DMs were "punishing" you. The last part is the most egregious as it is considered a violation of the Code of Conduct, and particularly disappointing because it displayed the manner of behavior that eventually led to your removal the first time around.

Again, this has not broken any terms, rules or plans put down – and as above do not think this is a fair argument to be merited as a complaint but as a concern. Forgetting exp, again is a concern and do not feel it merits as a overal violation of any terms. EXP was always promptly awarded once it was brought to my attention a player was left out. It is important to point out that the players (overall) were very happy - otherwise I would expect many more complaints, this is also being unfair due to how unstable the server was back then (it crashed a lot) combined with my cilent crashing.
I do however take resonsibilty for explaining it was the HDMs who put the 7 player limit on me; though this was something I brushed up on in Skype – where it seemed **** was OK with me explaining this fact. This does not excuse the fact I broke the DM code of conduct, I said it was the HDMs who put this limit on me, and that should not have been said -- for that I do applogies, and this is a merited point.

April 4, we received a report that you had given a ring with +1 regeneration as a reward. This is considered a very powerful item and you did not receive HDM permission prior to giving it.

A +1 regen ring, was handed out by mistake - my cilent was unstable and laggy (have reports and logs to prove this claim) when giving out DM rewards, the ring had vanished from the 'box' and I was unaware of its properties or even that it was missing. No player pointed this out to me, and I was not made aware of the issue. Concerns from the DM team show the DM Creater is a mess and it is very easy to spawn in; incorrect NPCs (level) and items.
No offical notice was given to the HDM team as this was not intended to be done, and not something I was aware of. Thus I believe it is unfair to pin this on me as a 'complaint' without a follow up of my version of events.

April 6, a complaint came up that you pushed an event with many players on an associate DM. Not only is this considered a breach of probation (as you are restricted to small events in both scale and participants, and the fact that you had to move it to an ADM suggests no full DM was supervising you at the time), this is not a fair action to do on the ADM as they are learning to DM, themselves, and may not be experienced with handling mass events.

Again, taken out of context -- and refers to my bullet point above; If you would have spoken with either me (Lobo) or **** (the ADM involved, which you didn't) you would have got the other end of the story. I have a full statment from DM Wisp proving this event was not 'forced' on him, furthermore 6 players were present at the time, but I can confirm it grew due to the 'shout' (again this is all documented) which attracted people to 'wonder' thus the number grew -- I did not host for over 7, nor did I force this event on Wisp, nor was it an epic event, refer to my write up page for details on what happend.

Then at April 10, we received two complaints from different people. The first one raised issues about favoritism as it seemed you have been focusing your events on a select few people as of late. The second one reported that your events have been creating server instability due to the size and scope of it, and also raised concern over favoritism due to your aforementioned focusing events on a few people.

I made it clear that I was focusing on guilds, and part of that ideology is having repeat players. Refer to my logs to confirm my claims (and the players involved) I hosted for two guilds offically; CandleKeep, then I moved to The Elder Circle. I have multiple statments from players involved in my events that I do not show favortisum - I never hosted for *my* guild, or anyone in it. It is true however that the theme of my events did focus on one guild or two guilds at a time; thus some groups of people were often making repeat apprances; however once the plot concluded with said guild I moved onto a fresh set of players.This claim can appear to have merit via numbers aka 15 events for x players and 15 for x others - however in reailty all players get the same amount of 'Lobo time' and not one or any other player gets special treatment. I can back up this claim also with full log files and player statments. Brushing this as a favortisum claim makes as much sense as me accusing DM Flasmix of hosting for only 9 people for the weekly UD events.

I have always been skittish about this issue, and am upset you did not consult me about it first -- I even asked if It was OK to host for the Elder Circle BEFORE taking it on, due to the conections Bembel has with Terri (I have no IC relationship with that guild either) All players had a equal chance, and equal time. Once the plot concluded, I moved on.

At April 14, we received a complaint over your new plot regarding the scope of the event and lore implications. On top of not consulting the team whether it would be lore-appropriate to begin with, the scope of the event is in violation of the terms of your probation requiring you to keep your events small.

I kept my events 'small' and never broke the 7 player limit (unless given permission to do so) It was made clear as long as the scale and size of the event is kept under 7 and did not become global (unless DM permission was given, which it was in regard to my metaplot with Riddle, however I still did not break the 7 rule) I was allowed to host it, I followed both terms. I never went over 7 players -- even for events that should really have been (aka the island attack)

Hidden: show


The plot was on my plotline thread for weeks – and it was brushed up with the CC team first before I began posting drafts – which were on my threads for review for weeks before it went live.

At April 17, we received another complaint over the scope of your events, in this case the one involving a "Prince of Chaos" (regardless whether it is canonical or not, it is a figure major enough to warrant feedback before using, especially as an ADM). You only retconned it to a lesser demon when I called you out on it in the DM Skype chat, and you finally asked for feedback regarding a unicorn NPC two weeks after you have already been using it.

The whole event was brushed up with the CCs (as it was a metaplot event for the surface) and was OKed and approved -- furthermore it was all written up on my plot thread for review several weeks before hosting it. No red flags were set off and I was under no intention this was a problem.

Bottom line is this; I tried - I tried very hard and am willing to work with everyone on the team. I hosted over 40 events and 2 big events (with permission) for the CCs, and the UD. I worked up a draft with DM Flasmix for the UD weekly plots and stayed in close contact with him regarding the storyline / outcome.

I agree, I had one or two missteps here, and I fully acknowledge them. I do not think it is fair to wrap all these things up and package them as they have been here. I really do want to work with the DM team and be part of the Team. And if it will ease the concern I will opt to stop hosting altogether and focus on supporting the main DMs (as I said above)

I showed willingness to learn (though I did show residence to the 7 rule, I still obeyed it) being an ADM, I was hoping some form of leeway would be given considering I am an ADM, not a full DM. I agree some of these things (though I do not consider them serious enough to warrant this action) are valid -- and could have been addressed if I was made aware sooner.

I would like to take onboard the email **** said and start fresh with her and ****. I am willing to put forward ideas to help make their job easier as well as mine.

Thank you for your time admin team, I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this,

,DM Lobo

[Akroma666]

One of the complaints was airing DM-side issues publicly, e.g. that you were being "punished" in front of players to explain the player limit. Players do not need to know that (and it is a violation of the Code of Conduct to boot)

I have only got a little ways in, and i already find this to be contradictory to what Maecius said:

Just to clarify this, for you guys as much as for everyone else: You're welcome to discuss the reasons for your own departures. The staff just doesn't discuss them with uninvolved parties without your consent and involvement.

So I'd like to know which is accurate? Or is it a matter of personal opinion at the time?

Secondly.. why is the complaint of having to decide amungst player who will leave even a report worth taking? I have been told to do that by countless DMs and usually a player steps forward and moves on. It's cleaner. Why is this a problem? Sounds to me like mountains were made of molehills. I want to finish this later when i get more time.

[chad878262]

Seems pretty clear, one is discussing the terms of reinstatement while the other is terms of removal. I can understand not wanting a DM to tell players during an event he/she is being punished for this or that since it detracts from the in game experience.

That said, I find the most troubling thing in the back and forth is where Lobo indicates that other ADM's and DM's aren't aware of some rules or don't take them seriously. Such rules should absolutely apply to everyone on the team equally, so I hope that is something that either has been or is being addressed on a larger scale.

[aaron22]

i dont understand complaining over any of this.


things i would complain to the HDM after discussion with the DM personally.
-repeated and overt disrespect to me as a player. aka personal attack.
-repeated and overt destruction of my PC's RP or goals for no reason after discussion proved that this was not a greater personal story arc.
-overt public disrespect of another player or admin. any person who can be tied to the game personally.


really cannot see right now any other reason to complain. people are not perfect. you are not. i am not. no body. DMing is not that easy. accidents can happen when using the client. people. you need to be thankful. critical is ok, but do it in a helpful manner. these complaints stink of crying. baby crying.

log in.
play
have fun.
dont be a D#%K.

[Nemni]

Even if there is truth in some complaints against Lobo (or the other DMs), I wonder if the HDMs are really weighing this against what the DMs are also doing that is good? Even if Lobo made some misstakes, he also created a lot of fun for a ton of players. I've played many hours where Lobo was the only one online. Now there will likely be no DMs online. Is this really an improvement for the server?

Farewell Lobo, you will be missed

[Kiran]

Considering he outed a whole guild to be I imagine "liked" to another guild, telling them of their plans and such, I don't really see how such a person could remain DM or even try and excuse such behaviour with being a "hot head"

[DM Lobo]

Please see above text in blue.

[Kiran]

I have Pm'd you so you know exactly WHICH incident I refer to.

[kleomenes]

Its not a good look when someone has to be reminded of the particular time that they released meta info learned via privileged access to other members of the community inappropriately.

Its a bit of a red flag to me.

[DM Dialectic]

It is DM policy not to publicly comment on why a recent DM left the DM Team in order to protect their public reputation after they are no longer on the Team, so it does not hurt their player experience, so the DM Team will not be formally engaging in this thread beyond this post. As long as the thread otherwise follows forum rules, we recommend to the Moderators that we leave it open.

[aaron22]

I have Pm'd you so you know exactly WHICH incident I refer to.

would you be apposed to showing it? this thread is about transparency. I can understand if you do not kiran, but i think it matters to you, and so in turn. to us.

[chad878262]

He should not share details since the incident purports to involve divulging meta info about a player or players, perhaps an entire guild?

That goes beyond transparency to giving out exactly the type of information that DM's should be trying to protect. Some guilds prefer secrecy and that is as it should be. It adds to the RP experience and would be ruined if those types of details were made public.

[DM Lobo]

(Edited barring investigation. Seeking clarification that permission was sought before this player's personal correspondence was aired on the public forum.)

[aaron22]

i can understand this. but that might or might not be pretty incriminating evidence. this is a video game we are talking about though. its not national security. lives are not at stake here. it is not the secrets of area 51 or anything. its a video game. plans come and go with every DM in/out.

*shrugs

[VillageGreenWitch]

For what it's worth, I was in the event on March 11th and I considered the approach to let the players decide amongst themselves who's to stay a very good one.
Infact it's the only feasible way in my opinion.
Why? Possible favouritism problems.

I have been DM myself on two servers (both much smaller in player numbers than this one) - if there is one thing I learnt really really fast it's that players remember the exact details of what you said/wrote/emoted/did/decided for years to come while you as DM cannot keep all those details. Not even if you screenshotted every single line of text, each spell you cast as an NPC and each time you logged in an out.

Now imagine Lobo had thrown me out at that event (would have been pretty sensible as I was not there from the beginning, although before the player number grew beyond 5 iirc.) I played Aly'andra back then, my more-or-less-retired ranger. He would have done what he weas tasked with ("take responsibility" in other words "reject players because he's not allowed to host events for more than 6 players.").
Somehow he would have perhaps even managed to throw me out of the event without making me wonder of the reasons by saying "I am not allowed to host for more than 6 people" - which is by the way what he said as a reasoning, I very much fail to see how this is a serious calling out. What should he have said as a reason? "There is no reason at all, I just don't like hosting for more than 6 persons."?!
In my opinion forcing this "maximum of 6" rule of him and at the same time enforcing the "don't tell anyone of that rule!" . . . makes me wonder how Lobo should have avoided complaints against him at all. Regardless which option he chose there he only had the chance to appear as a bad boy.

Anyway, onward with the imagining. He throws me out, I accept his decision. Just because I am a former DM I don't even feel like complaining about him because I know that DMs have to decide things all the time and that there is not a single decision ever every involved player is happy about.


Four weeks later.
Lobo has hosted a couple more events since then, I have begun to play Shea exclusively. Lobo and me hadn't any interaction in the meantime, though, since he and me were never on at the same time.
This afternoon, though, just as Lobo is starting another event, I stumble into it with Shea, just by accident. And I am the 7th player.
Lobo - perhaps remembering that he threw out an elven ranger several weeks ago but of course not knowing anymore that he had to reject the very same player on another toon back then tells me that I have to leave because I am the 7th player. Again no reasoning (as to not violate the 2nd rule enforced on him).

I don't know about you - but I would seriously consider being not liked by Lobo then.
Perhaps a thought like "he does not like me because he doesn't like somewhat shady figures." crosses my mind. (Both Aly'andra and Shea are not exactly paladins, after all.)
"He favours other people over me." is not far away at that point.

And he wouldn't even know that he did something "wrong" to me!


What I want to say by this probably is: I perfectly understand why the fear/paranoia of favouritism is so strong here.
When I left the server in Autumn 2010 it was because certain members of three certain guilds had just - backed up by a group of DMs - completely screwed over a fourth guild which I happened to be a member of. There were serious metagaming, godmodding and grieving incidents involved in that. Ridiculously overpowered items were given out to the members of at least one of the three guilds.
And it escalated as it did because certain people were not able to distinguish IC from OOC and vice versa and favoured their IC/OOC buddies.

A lot has changed for the better since then as far as I can see. And I can only imagine how difficult a task it must have been to get rid of all those favouritism ties, all the drama and the spite.

I do however get the impression - from reading the above letter - that perhaps, just perhaps, the fear of the "Return of 2009" may have led to some overreaction.
Blaming a DM for "ignoring tells" while everyone and their dog know that Lobo crashed 20+ times a day during that time and that tells can be written for a minute or two after the DM lost connection just because it takes that long to lag out . . . seems at best "slightly unfair" to me.

Or in other words: being a DM at BG:TSCC seems to require being absolutely perfect, have a perfect computer, conncection, eidetic memory and absolutely no flaws at all.

If I had tried to be DM on these conditions I had not lasted a single week.

(The above text is in no way meant as an attack at anyone but just a seriously worried comment of someone who came back to this server more than 1 year ago because it seemed to be so much more adult, level-headed and fair nowadays.)