1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Hail Guest!,
    Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Author Wes Locher has teamed up with Stratics for a giveaway of his new book Braving Britannia. This book explores the history and impact of Ultima Online and includes interviews from current and past dev team members as well as many UO and Stratics community members. Click here for more details!
    Dismiss Notice

Solution to the Riddle of "Classic Shards"

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Fayled Dhreams, Jan 1, 2011.

  1. Solution to the Riddle of "Classic Shards"

    Not too "Grandiose" a title, I humbly submit, as it goes succinctly to the following body of text.
    While differing "formats" for writing exist, such as Friendly letter, Formal complaint, business, scientific, Thesis/topic sub-topic and point by point support.
    I choose to write this as a conversation, between myself and the community at large.
    Mods and "commenters" are thus forewarned: this isn't about some individual "style" or "format", this is about what the title says: Solution to the Riddle of "Classic Shards" ... and while made of many points and pieces, the "solution" is acquired when taken as a "whole" NOT the specific order of assembly.

    hello world
    I am: your Fayled Dhreams
    I am as real and as virtual as you are and WE are as real and virtual as the game is and the corporate entity/s (for the moment EA) is a peer to US and the world revolves around the sun as it does ... that is the way the universe currently is, THAT is the stage that we "play" on ... least wise it is the way >it is< as I see it.
    Perhaps that is what Kelmo means with his "it is what it is" and you either understand << that ... or not. *shrugs*

    In this universe, we consider ourselves to be players in a "sandbox". One part of the solution(applies to all parts in actuality) lay in "Definitions".
    Simply put: that which defines "it" as what We >agree< "it is" ... so, what IS a "sandbox"? here is one definition of "sandbox "
    To refine that for the purpose of "the solution":
    A sandbox has sand AND a framework that contains it. The sand represents the "atomics", the smallest pieces that can be used to play with ... too much and you have a sand lot, even more and you have a beach... a world.
    The "framework" is what is used to define the >boundaries< of the box, you are either In the Box .. or out ... agreed? *grins*

    And for the purpose of the solution: Sand is pixels and Framework is software, existing (as it is) on hardware.(computers and networks)

    game & play as agreed upon by "Players"
    Hail and well met! good players ... are you familiar with the concept of Suspension of Disbelief?
    For the purposes of this solution ... let us PRETEND that you are ... *grin*

    The Riddle of "the Classic Shard"
    How can it be, that an idyllic virtual world, populated by role players ... could fall apart?

    CSa(classic shard anonymous): Well, some few of the players ... were playing their part "over the top".
    How so? didn't the sandbox allow for how some would play with varying degrees of skill/commitment?
    CSa well yes, but they were playing it to excess, practically psychotic, and it was distracting to the point where other "good players" were leaving.
    Oh My! didn't the theater(virtual world) owners address that?
    CSa well yes, but after they were "ejected/reprimanded" ... they came back
    Oh My! didn't the theater(virtual world) owners address that?
    CSa well yes, but they did it in the wrong way!
    Oh My! *leans in attentively* what did they do that was so wrong?

    CSa Well, what they did was, basically, copied "our" world and adjusted the framework "there" so that the over the top behavior couldn't be done "there" to excess.
    What was wrong with that?
    CSa well ... obviously, we were left with the worst of the psycho's and the bulk of players moved away to >there< !!!
    well, why didn't you move there?
    CSa well ... obviously because we were here FIRST !!!
    Oh ... I see ... so they should have fixed the framework >here< and moved the psychos there under the old copied rule set.
    CSa No No No! they should never have "split the population up" ... THAT is what they did wrong ... they split the population up.

    *Narrows eyes and leans back*
    Ah! ... I see ... *slowly lights pipe ... puffs* And what Role did you sign up to play?
    CSa well ... that is beside the point Now ... the theater(virtual world) owners screwed that all up by separating the players.
    *puffs* no, that is incorrect as far as a direct response to MY question: what Role did you sign up to play?
    CSa well, I'm not a "role player"*spits* ... I'm a "Gamer"*beams* and a damn'd fine Gamer at that!

    Be that as it maybe, gamer ... but were you aware that we ARE talking about a sandbox, built for Role Players, By Role players?
    And that the "role players" are actually doing quite well? Using the sandbox with all of the "additions" that have been added ...
    the lands for stages and the props you call items and the wardrobes that can be created and re-arranged as they like?
    And all because the psychos, as you described them, WERE separated from the role players sandbox?

    For the role players that "population separation" worked out quite well. The psycho's effect, remains somewhat ... but it has been reduced to the level of "hecklers" and those few that choose to heckle still ... aha! they can reasonably be dealt with as well ...By the Players .. the actors ... the role players practiced in their craft. And "extreme" cases can also be handled ... kicked up to management as it were ... and yes! even though they were "ejected/reprimanded" and they returned ... those hecklers were more easily identified by management(and the role players practiced in their craft), as their names and accounts and ip's became more familiar.

    That they still persist is inconsequential.


    Ah! Dear Friends, gather round and be Well met!
    may this missive find you healthy and prosperous
    and thy enemies broken and in confusion and suicidal despair
    and their families weeping and wailing
    with much gnashing of teeth and regrets.

    How can it be, that an idyllic virtual world, populated by role players ... could fall apart?
    It has not. IT HAS NOT "fallen apart" ... that is merely the false premise that "gamers" have presented
    Those who >refuse< to play in an acceptable "Role" in OUR Role playing Sandbox.

    This nameless Troupe of Gamers ... have laid FALSE claim to OUR stage, Our props, Our Way, OUR SANDBOX
    and have the stated purpose to *ahem* return it to a land of constant chaos and "risk" that >they claim to hold the true way of<
    They do not. They ONLY bring the return to constant chaos and risk and nothing else ... aside from the possibility of destroying the stage
    Our sandbox.

    Now I know ... we thought the classic shard question had been settled long ago, when our sand box was built, and the armed drunken hecklers were prevented from our stage; and the management of the theater was gracious enough to enforce the separation of certain patrons ... Role players to this area and Gamers to the "riskier" equally large area over there ...
    to the point: WE thought WE had an AGREEMENT with management
    *sigh* apparently "management" lost track of that, for they have agreed to once again "examine it"
    *face palm* poor dupe.

    Speech 101
    Know your audience
    Know your subject
    Never let them see you sweat
    Speak clearly to the entire audience with the intent that it is heard in the cheap seats(chin up, chest out, from the diaphragm)
    Speak Only to Your audience and Only on the Subject at hand
    Hecklers are not to be addressed, noted and researched to be addressed later, if necessary, but only in the above listed steps.

    Just a reminder/review of some basics we know to be true
    the "mechanics" of the props are inconsequential. Nice to have a "functioning" pistol ...
    but a finger and a *Bang!* will do (once a sufficient climate/agreement is set under the principle of Suspended Disbelief)
    and "the mechanics" should be addressed Only (constantly) by management ... to wit: remove the "bugs" ...
    the busted hinges, the cranky trap door, the wobbly ladders and burned out kliegs ... we "can do" with candles for crying out loud ...
    it would be easier if the damn theater weren't so damn drafty ... EH ???

    And let us as "actors" not forget the wider range of patrons that have appeared around our stages and towns ... let us gently refer to them as "merchants" ... gently but not "slightly" ... for there is a great deal of >seriousness< that they live and ply their trades by; A quick gloss of the Tale of Slippers show why a gentle and wise addressing is necessary. Oh my goodness shiny props that were worn in a movie ... yes. They ARE serious indeed.
    And NOT "role playing" ... perhaps "crazy" to US ... but ... O'well ... it takes all types, thank the gods ... makes for more mythology for US to portray.

    Finally, I address "the press"
    Dear Stratics
    Thank you for allowing me participation on your pages. Not to mention the Years of reviews and archiving services and stages for debates, great and small. And the coverage of the History of Ultima Online. In short, though often unspoken, you are as much of us as we are of you and have been "with us" through an unprecedentedly LONG journey.

    *takes a knee and a silent moment* :scholar:To friends present and departed, Salute!
    Is there a Caeser Dop in da house? Can we get an ABM up for 1-1-11?

    To "business" then ... and yes, you already know the matter. Tis not unannounced nor unknown.

    Once again it is time to relegate the Classic shard topic OFF the front pages. In whatever manner you may choose. Be aware though, the proceeding paragraphs of Fayleds inimitable rhetoric DO introduce a new (and I feel) complete: Six sided box that will crush it in anyway that it appears long into the future.
    The "box" is an analogy that my family has used for many years to assess and describe any problem. It is six sided in that it has a top, bottom, left, right, front and rear. Co-joined at the edges and without any other aspects to it other than "0" holes ... it contains, completely, on all sides regardless of orientation: "The Problem"

    The box, by family practice, is constructed by answering a series of "why?" and this can be a tortuously Long series of why's ...
    Parents of young children know how frustrating that can get, My families "rule" is that for every why, there must be a cogent answer, and that cogent answer is not Of The Form of: "because I said so", because, I don't know, silence(figurative or literal), shut up!, stop ... you get the drift.
    It is of great benefit for parents with children, for not only may the child be learning, the parent can be learning both themselves and their child simultaneously. The key part and goal is THE PARENTS learning results, not the child's.

    The why game can also be played solo, for practice. It can also be played in public, from either side(asking or answering) for a myrid of "purposes". I used it to box the problem of Classic shards. I "finished" the box at time stamped here ... ten years, my god ... *shrugs*
    I allowed as how it might be tortuously Long.
    The "final piece" was noticing the lack of a "story teller", and I had overlooked that aspect for that long(the length of the argument For a classic)

    Now to the six sides of the box.
    1. I as the OP am the Story Teller, the one who knows the beginning the middle and the end. And of course all the connecting bits, twixt characters and plots and scenes and props. I practiced and examined the story, gathered an audience and began.
    2. I tell the details that will apply, in this case I defined the "sandbox", what it is not only made of, but the limits to which I will go.
    3. I also define "the listeners", call them the players and the rules that will govern their "parts"; Plainly remind them of the requirement to Suspend disbelief.
    4. I describe "the Scenario of the Classic Shard"(perform the play) and identify the protagonists and antagonists as Role players and Gamers.
    5. At the end of the scenario, I turn to the true audience that I have called, My fellow Role players and explain the epilogue, the denouement, the parable, the moral, the end.
    6. I then write my own synopsis, review, cliff notes ... and bring them here, to the press and
    with a preface like:
    Not too "Grandiose" a title, I humbly submit, as it goes succinctly to the following body of text.
    I begin at #1 ... snick! the box is sealed, the problem "contained" and the "need for further discussion" is gone.

    As to "further discussion" ... hellooo Stratics, the trolls will likely ask:
    What if Cal says there will Be a classic shard?
    Then Cal doesn't know the difference between Gamers and Role Players ... doh!

    Are any Stratics staff familiar with the old adage ... the squeaky wheel gets the grease?
    how about the final follow on?
    Which wheel is likely to be the FIRST wheel to discard/replace?

    Play Why? with all sides for awhile
    Put the Classic shard topic someplace else.
    It is the new definition of Troll Bait.

    I am, as always
    Your: Fayled Dhreams
    Fiat justitia, ruat coelum
    "Let justice be done, though the heavens fall"
    1-1-11 :scholar: For Us All