Questions for Rusty

[Rotku]

With the resent drama, do you feel you have a good enough relationship with the current Admin to effective work as a team?

[Rusty]

Sure.

[ThinkTank]

[Lusipher]

Im actually proud of you Rusty. This has been a boys club for years. Its nice to see someone not take sides and actually do what their supposed to be doing. Regardless of who the person was or his or her standing in the community. I find this whole thing kinda funny since pre quake this is the kind of stuff some Dms thought went on with that current Admin.

[paazin]

Thanks, TT. You can always be counted on.

[paazin]

Hi Rusty,

These probably don't need to be asked, as you're effectively the incumbent and we've nearly a year of your tenure to see your policies. However, I'd still like you to comment if you would.

I'm curious first of how you see your management style. Do you see yourself as someone who regularly would involve himself within what a specific DM is doing (keeping tabs to make certain that DMs follow the proscribed standards, especially if you have suspicions that there could be impropriety) or would you trust the HDM of the server to take an active role in his/her DMs?

Do you believe in using the hierarchy of HDM and EADM first, before approaching the DM himself with any issues; I suppose relatedly how do you see the server-ALFA relationship? There have been problems before with specific HDMs being unresponsive and/or having issues with the DM Admin, and I'm curious what thoughts you have to getting any impasses solved. If it were deemed a necessity, would you sack a HDM or perform disciplinary action?

Thanks,

paazin

[Rusty]

Hi paaz.

I keep... or, rather, I kept... an eye on server DM forums as it's important to be at least generally informed with the day-to-day activities of the DM corps. It also creates the opportunity to nip problems in the bud before they become serious, or identify problems effecting more than one server.

A good example of the first was when there was a slight concern over one particular DM and their ability to distance themselves from one of the players that they were DMing. I had a chat with the HDM, who shared my concerns, and we concluded that the DM was wholly trustworthy, but it would be worth the HDM keeping an eye on what was going on to prevent any suspicions of inappropriate behaviour from developing.

A good example of the second was when the staff of one server were discussing the propriety of using "RP Spells" to escape combat. I suggested that we bring the discussion up to an ALFA-wide level to ensure consistency. That discussion is not concluded, fwiw.

I also chat fairly regularly to a large number of DMs and HDMs, all of whom I've had an excellent working relationship with, and I maintained one of my Staff roles as a specific NWN1 DM liaison. Brokenbone held that role, but he resigned with me. He'll take that up again if I'm re-elected.

In terms of the ALFA-server relationship, I've always maintained that HDMs are responsible for stewarding the servers on the community's behalf. It's an important role, but also a demanding one. I think the best approach is probably to share out the various tasks amongst the whole DM team, with the EDM in particular taking some of the burden from the HDM, but it's also vital that we have a single point of authority and accountability on each server. The ideal is for ALFA to provide the broad framework within which each server can operate freely, allowing the various nuances of style and approach full reign. In terms of dealing with HDMs failing to fulfil their duties, I've already demonstrated that, in extreme circumstances, I am prepared to take action. It's pretty clear to anyone who looks at the state of SD that it was the right action to take. I think that DMA needs to be aware as soon as the actions of one DM start having serious negative consequences on the ability of other DMs to run their campaigns, and needs to take action himself if no other solution works.

Essentially, the role of DMA involves a being in a partnership with the HDMs, both collectively and individually. I communicate regularly with our current HDMs via the HDM forum and also, with some of them, via IRC. I've had a year to develop those partnerships and that's definitely a strength.

Thnxpaaz.

[Valdimir]

Do you see yourself as someone who regularly would involve himself within what a specific DM is doing (keeping tabs to make certain that DMs follow the proscribed standards, especially if you have suspicions that there could be impropriety) or would you trust the HDM of the server to take an active role in his/her DMs?

Do you believe in using the hierarchy of HDM and EADM first, before approaching the DM himself with any issues; I suppose relatedly how do you see the server-ALFA relationship? There have been problems before with specific HDMs being unresponsive and/or having issues with the DM Admin, and I'm curious what thoughts you have to getting any impasses solved. If it were deemed a necessity, would you sack a HDM or perform disciplinary action?

Mind if I address this from a HDM perspective?

Over the last year or so, Rusty has been a very proactive DMA. I don't always agree with his policies. For example, I was reluctant to take away valuable DM time to conduct his mandated wealth standards training. I felt it would be better served for NWN2. In the end, I relented, realizing that this was sign that he still cared about NWN1 and hadn't given it up for dead. He has seemingly found a nice balance between NWN1 and 2 and seems knowledgable on both. Most of his hard work goes unnoticed, like the reorganization of the DM Wiki.

Rusty is very direct, in his words "mean." I don't think so. Don't get me wrong, there is probably very few in ALFA he has not pissed off at one time or another, but directness can sometimes be refreshing. He pays close attention to everything that goes on and is not afraid to confront DMs he thinks may be out of line. He doesn't play favorites. As HDM, he has always given me the opportunity to address any DM on my team before intervening and he is always available to hear my complaints. He is open to suggestions and has trusted me to handle my own problems on more than one occassion.

On a personal level, I very much like Danny and Rick. I'll admit that on a selfish level, I would much prefer to have Danny continue DMing and not worry about the responsibilities of the DMA position. I spent a long time on DF and really enjoyed Rick's mad skillz. Understanding the immense workload of being a HDM on an established server, I have a difficult time seeing how he could be a HDM and DMA simulataneously, especially without NWN1 floundering. Both are excellent DMs and people, but based on the last year or so, I am going to have to endorse Rusty for DMA. Of course, havings said that, I am sure to grind my teeth over that statement sometime in the next six months...

[paazin]

Thanks for the response Rusty, while I'm mulling it over what to follow up with asking, there's another question I wanted to ask;

There have been some complaints about your management style and policy, that some DMs felt 'constricted' by your implementation and overseeing of standards, perhaps to the point of creating situations where things that would make IC sense could not happen because of OOC wealth/level reasons. More than once people have mentioned the 'fun' was being drawn from the game by too much rules-lawyering.

What sort of response, if any, do you have to that, and do you think you could do anything in your second term to allay concerns like that?

[Wynna]

With the resent drama, do you feel you have a good enough relationship with the current Admin to effective work as a team?

With all due respect to the candidate, I would like to follow up on that question, as I'm not sure the response covered the magnitude of emotions of the past days. Many accusations have been thrown about; strikes and warnings have been issued, and, I'm afraid, it is my belief that your arguments have approached verbal assault at times in private. Tempers are still running hot and people I consider eminently reasonable on both sides are either ready to quit, have quit, or are demanding your head. You currently labor under my close watch for misbehavior, a watch I do not intend to let lapse. Indeed, between a warning and an opportunity to apologize this week, you have received two second chances. I must say, there will be no more. There must be no more insulting of people privately or publicly. They are unacceptable. Civilized people do not behave like that. If necessary, and you cross the line again, there will be a strike, and if contested, the history of verbal assault will be put before the HDMs to decide.

So, with all that history, convince me -- as a voter -- that the back-breaking amount of work that you do and the trust of your DM corps and the undoubted expertise in Standards you bring to the position is worth the potential for drama, conflagration and personnel loss that you bring with you? It is, quite honestly, a toss-up in my mind at this point.

Thank you.

[Rotku]

What extent do you plan to go to to make sure all the standards are located in one, easy-to-read, location? Currently, as I'm sure you know, they are located in different places, with no one source of authority (so to speak). I know this is something that HEEGZ was planning to fix during his term. Do you have any plans along this line?

[psycho_leo]

Rick mentions in his questions thread that a number of former DMs said they wouldn't apply for DMing again if they have to go through the app once again. So, would you consider re-evaluating the process (at least for former DMs)? And why do you believe some of our members think the process is too much work?

[ç i p h é r]

With the resent drama, do you feel you have a good enough relationship with the current Admin to effective work as a team?

Let's be perfectly clear about this. Rusty burned his bridges beyond repair and he did it knowing full well the tragic consequences of his actions.

[Lusipher]

So basically the Admin are saying their tanking his bid for DMA?

Cause this is the first time in a long time if ever I can recall Admin stepping in and smacking a candidate around in his own question thread.

[Rusty]

The standards provide a framework for every DM to operate within. The training process I implemented was inevitably more demanding than it will be going forwards because of legacy wealth issues, and the fact that DMs were often dealing with high-level PCs in possession of complicated items. They are, overall, getting close to as simple as we can make them (I've a few refinements to make), and where there are complexities, they usually arise frmo DMs trying to do something very complex themselves. You can make a Staff +1, +1 fire, +1 Wis, +2 Open Lock, CLW (7) 1/day, Lightning Bolt (5) (5 charges/use), Detect Magic (1) (1 charge/use), Heal (single use), 17 charges, but well, it's going to be tricky to price. On the other hand, the basic principles of pricing and awarding are straightforward. Retrofitting to a campaign is inevitably slightly painful: I do think, however, that we're at a stage where almost everyone recognises the necessity of structured standards for our future.

In terms of unreasonably restricting DMs, I don't buy it. I've not been made aware of a single instance in which they have had the effect of seriously inhibiting anything remotely approaching reasonableness. This is a PW: that means lots of campaigns run by lots of DMs. We have to have agreed parameters in which we operate, simply to prevent different campaigns screwing each other over. Believe me, while I haven't had any articulate complaints about having to change a campaign to avoid breaching standards, I have received some fairly vocal complaints about the consequences of DMs who have acted with disregard for our standards. The standards, as they operate, have more than enough flexibility for any reasonable DM, particularly when one factors in features such as "RP Awards", which are covered in the draft ALFA DMG. Moreover, they are designed to operate in an IC manner. Underwealth PCs should be given slightly increased awards (and vice versa) rather than simply plonking down a huge pile of loot (or vice versa). So, yeah, I've not seen any actual instances where sensible IC actions were inhibited by our standards. Maybe they're out there, but if they are not brought to my attention, there is precious little that I can do about it. Give me a specific example and I'll respond specifically, otherwise that's the only answer I can give.

Come NWN2, we'll build these in from the ground up. Everyone who wants to DM in NWN2 is going to have an introduction to what they are and why they are so, and this is going to mean we avoid some of the destructive disparities that we, er, enjoyed in NWN1. This is one of the reasons for having a proper DM Application process as well. Many ex-DMs have never had any instruction whatsoever in how to use our standards, and none have been through any kind of introduction to our XP standards for NWN2. By having a formal process, with clearly set out stages, we go a long way to guaranteeing the kind of consistency that this community has been screaming out for for years. In terms of DMs being unwilling to go through this: that is a choice they can make. DMing is a privilege, not a right. The demands are low, and easily met by anyone who has experience DMing in ALFA before. If DMing in ALFA isn't worth filling in a very simple form and learning our revised Standards, then that's that. I should probably point out that I've gone through this process, so has Brokenbone (who was on my Staff), and so has Wynna (who is Lead Admin) as well as several other DMs. If it's good enough for them (er, us?), then it's good enough for everyone.

ALFA needs some consistency across the DM Corps. That starts with the application process. Having special exemptions for chosen ALFAns is no way to go about this.