[Milawe]

Prof, I find that the problem is that if I make an observation about someone who shares your opinion but don't name names, you take it on as a criticism of you. If I do name names, then it becomes a personal attack. As much as you might like to be, you are not the only representative of a certain feature set. There are other people involved, and since they have blatantly stated what their motivation is on this matter, I can definitely say "deliberate". It might not be a deliberate attempt on your part.

It is the entirety of the argument. If even one person holds that position and creates the argument and that's what is being argued, it doesn't matter if you don't hold that position. It's not all about you. There are other people participating. You don't get to represent them all just because they enjoy the same feature set as you. The definition of RPI or AFS or whatever you want to call it is not a "fact", it's heavily up to interpretation which has been made obvious by these discussions. It's even worse if you read RPImud.com where permadeath is not even a required factor to be listed there (as stated by one of the staff members). So, you see, your "fact" is merely an opinion that's been voiced loudly over and over. Just because you wish for people to define RPIs like you do, many, many people don't for all the problems that have been discussed. These are real problems shared by many including the RPI community itself. Turning a blind eye to the situation and taking the flaws to be personal attacks don't solve it.

Again, if even one person stated that it was something better or implied that it was something better as fact, then it doesn't really matter what your personal stance is. I'll state again that your opinion or posts are not the only ones that count. You could post everything perfectly and be the nicest guy possible (and you really haven't been but neither have a lot of people, myself included), if someone else creates the situation, it's still there rather you intended for it to be or not. You've partaken in these discussions as much as I have. You've seen the people who have blatantly posted that the feature set you prefer is superior to other roleplaying out there. This forces others to defend their roleplayers and their own games because those statements are stated as fact, not opinion. Why do we have to do that? Because by leaving that opinion un-opposed, we are tacitly admitting that the roleplay is better on a specific type of game. Some representatives of those games cannot leave it as "It's a choice that appeals to different players." They try to force the opinion that it's inherently superior rather than they like it better.

No, you haven't been reading then and, thus, adding to the problem. The feature list itself is a preference set no matter how much history you want to dig up on it, and there are many things out there that confuse the issue even more that are beyond my control or your control. They are not your personal preferences, but they are a list of preference that actually has to be memorized and have had to recently been agreed upon. It is not intuitive, and it does not encompass enough players or games to make it mainstream. It has to be constantly defined and explained to keep it as you owuld like for people to understand it. Secondly, while the feature set has finally been hammered out, the ambiguous acronym of roleplay-intensive is a secondary problem. Again, this problem exists regardless of your personal preference or mine. Lots of players and people who do not partake in these forums (and even some who do) interpret it for what it seems to mean: "roleplay intensive" equals intense roleplay. RPImud.com's definition of the RPI muds seems to support the alternate interpretation as does the forums. The constant fight against the evolution of this term is what, to many of us, necessitates the change. I am not, however, insisting that you use my term, just as if you wanted to call MUDs online text games (OTG), I wouldn't be offended or take it personally.

Refrain from personal attacks on people's families, muds, and personal roleplaying abilities then? If you can't do that, put the people you can't stop flaming or hate so much you can't type straight on ignore. When I realized I was stooping to responding to flame bait and such, that's what I did. I acknowledge there are some personalities that I simply can't handle, and they bring out the worst in me.