Animal sponsorship donations means that the donator is entitled to be able to play a vanilla version of DF that includes the animal. Special abilities are strictly a bonus -- they were never guaranteed for all animals.
And that was entirely reasonable. He declared he would add an animal if you donated, and did as he promised, and as I said,
he felt the need to go above and beyond on some of those, and that is a great thing that he felt the desire to go out of his way to make some of the animals that he could spend the time on more than just copy-pastes, but given unique and special functionality in the game.
I am saying that's the example of Toady going out of his way to reward his donators that should be most encouraged.
As in, that was a compliment, not a complaint.
The reason I made reference to Impaler[WrG] was not that I think you're going to start a ripoff project. It's that fans of DF (and probably other projects) follow one of several arcs, kind of like stellar evolution. One of those arcs involves entitlement, loss of perspective, and a highly charged attitude toward the course of development. Cf. murlocdummy.
People aren't telling you to chill out because they think each of your statements is wrong. It's because your true/accurate/insightful points are surrounded by hysteria.
And that is why I'm making the point of arguing against exactly that sort of attitude.
You are assuming that anyone who gets angry or frustrated will inevitably turn into an element that will somehow try to backstab the community, and use that as a weapon against anyone you are judging to be too "Impaler-like".
Don't you think that inferring "traitor" on anyone who's already angry instead of trying to address their concerns in a reasonable manner might
maybe make the problem worse? Don't you think the proper manner of dealing with someone who thinks their concerns are not being heard might be to try to assure them in whatever way you can that they are, rather than insulting or mocking them for it, and pushing them to even more anger?
If you're going to try speaking to others as if you somehow carry some weight as a "spokesman of Toady", (and make no mistake, in his absence, that is exactly what mantle you are trying to assume,) that you should actually try diffusing some of that frustration, rather than inflaming it by belittling others or suggesting that you are only waiting for them to "turn traitor"?
In short, don't play DF or donate to Bay 12 if doing so, on the balance, gives you negative feelings.
Nor does it do Toady many favors to start selectively determining who you don't think should be playing or donating. If you want to try speaking as though you speak for him, at least try to be inclusive, as opposed to openly passing judgment over every single player, and declaring who you deem to be the traitors-to-be.
My problem, once again, is not with Toady. Toady has never been anything but reasonable in the times I've been able to talk to him, and he has always made me feel that I was being listened to when I did speak to him. He does not dismiss complaints out of hand. It is the people who feel they can speak for him that throw down emotionally loaded terms like "entitled" or imply that we are somehow "not fan enough" on anyone asking to be heard that I have a problem with.
This is not any sort of fanboyism.
I was going to let this one get buried, but this keeps coming up. So, for the record, I was using the term "fanboy" in response specifically to thvaz, and I was only doing so in specific response to his "nerd rage" statement.
The point (which, granted, was very poorly articulated due to my emotional status at the time, and a lapse in judgement,) was that using a pejorative term to summarily dismiss one person's argument is just as easy to be turned around on someone else. That is, if my statement can be easily dismissed as "nerd rage", his defenses of the game can be just as easily dismissed as "fanboyism".
Author
Topic: Future of the Fortress (Read 3735881 times)