Well, this certainly took a turn for the worse. This was never my intention, nor was it Baby Arms (that's what I gather from his posts, anyway.)
In an effort to make this post more readable, and not so fucking verbose, I'll only adress VD in this one.
Vault Dweller said:
Like I said, I don't see how this issue affects the Codex integrity or credibility. So far, you've failed to explain that.
Baby Arm did a better job on the visuals there, when the said: "The point/harm is that
interviewing yourself puts a bad taste in readers' mouths,
especially if they find this out afterwards. It looks shady". The bolded part here is the only inherent problem I see, and that should have been pretty fucking clear from the beginning. The part in italics could easily is only a problem if this isn't justified in a proper way. Now my point from the beginning was that a good breath mint would have been a sentence or two explaining, just as you've done in this thread, why you decided to include your game in this article.
Then there would be no problem and everyone would be satisfied.
Vault Dweller said:
It's not irrelevant for the reader to know that the interviewer and interviewee is the same. Which, after all, is the case here. Yes, I see there is no inherent problem with that interview as it is. But I also see that your two roles in that interview isn't clear enough. Which is the point I'm trying to make.
I agree, they are not. What I can't understand is why that's a problem? Again, if the questions were loaded, presenting other projects in a negative light, well, that would have been a different matter, requiring clarification, but since the questions are basically topics...
As I stated in my first post, my concerns weren't directed at The Codex regulars, but at new readers. And contrary to popular belief, exemplified by a certain rambler in this thread, the Codex has a shitload of non-regulars. This isn't something I pull out of my ass, it's simple math based on the numbers Dark Underlord presented in that NMA-feud. Again allow me to cite Baby Arm, as he does a better job at wording it (but at the same time, offended VD enough to get all drama queen on us):
Baby Arm said:
Now if I wasn't a regular here, I'd think "what a douchebag" and probably not bother coming back if this was my first experience with the site. While the Codex doesn't exist to cater to everyone's needs, it also doesn't need to chase away reasonable readers who expect some degree of professionalism when it comes to things like interviews and reviews".
Now if the point I've been nagging about since the beginning had been addressed, this wouldn't be a problem.
Vault Dweller said:
Further you are taking this personally, which you shouldn't.
I am?
Yes, which you since have proved by taking down the AoD-parts in the interview.
Vault Dweller said:
I think you manage those roles quite well. At least until this interview. The only thing I'm missing here is a clarification of your two roles, so there will be no misunderstandings, and so that no one else can make the arguments you are putting in my mouth, and be somewhat correct. I was just trying to be helpful, for crying out loud.
Thanks. Appreciate your efforts and all that. Now explain why I mismanaged my roles in this interview and why a clarification must be made immediately (other than "my friend was confused"), and I'll gladly do so.
I wish you just had done what I requested, rather that being childish, as you are now (in taking the AoD-bits out, not by this exact reply).
Vault Dweller said:
I wasn't talking about the hardcore RPG-crowd here. I was referring to that average Joe on the street who don't necessarily know more than that he want just an RPG to play.
In which case, the answer is simple: Oblivion - the best RPG money can buy!
You are aware of the fact that there exist people in between Halo-kid, and the hardcore Codex regular, right? Shades of gray.
Vault Dweller said:
I see. Well, sounds awesome. Now, why again are we doing all that? My questions are:
1. Why the readers should give a damn about my many names and roles? Considering the nature of the interview, this info is irrelevant. I might as well state my position on abortion and the war in Iraq. Hey, the readers have a right to know these things!
I've answered this by now, I think.
Vault Dweller said:
2. How did the public image of this fine institution suffer from the lack of the clarification and all the uncertainty?
Both Baby Arm and me has answered this by now.
Vault Dweller said:
3. Why do you think that agreeing with you is the only way to take your criticism seriously?
Because I think my criticism are quite objective, and personally see agreeing as the only way to take it seriously.
Vault Dweller said:
What if I do take it seriously (which is why I'm arguing with you, btw), but disagree with your points?
Then I'll keep on explaining in the best possible way I can, until you agree with what I view as an objective truth.
Vault Dweller said:
Does that make me a bad person?
It makes you stubborn.
Vault Dweller said:
The Codex is the most insightful and knowledgeable place for RPGs on the net. It is the best source for indie RPG-related news and content. No use in denying that.
Er? Did I deny it? No. Neither did I take credit for all the awesomness that is the Codex.
Please allow me to *sigh*. No you didn't deny it. Bad wording on my side, got a bit carried away, and honestly, that should have been obvious.
If i were to follow that path, I could ask "Er? Did I say you've taken credit for all the awesomeness that is the Codex?", but I won't. So don't bother to make a straw man funny remark of it either.
Vault Dweller said:
I'm planning to step down in the near future - without leaving the forums, of course, and that's what I meant.
That is a big shame, but off course a decision I both respect and understand. I wasn't aware of that being what you referred to, though. You place a heavy burden on the other staff-members then. Perhaps Fez will start to justify his admin powers, and perhaps you'll even recruit some more goons to take over for you.
Vault Dweller said:
I simply don't see the point (or the harm caused by the interview without clarification). I can take your or anyone else's criticism. If you've been reading the site for 4 years, you should know at least that much. Taking criticism and agreeing with criticism are two different things though.
Please allow me to inform you that the reason I've weighed my words in my replies to such a degree that I have (and all the emo-remarks directed towards me in the thread indicate that it shines through), just because I've been following you these four years. I've been quite aware of the danger of you just pulling out the AoD-parts out of the Interview, which was something I most certainly didn't want. Your comments directed to me through this thread proved this suspicion, and it just raised my alertness. This is why I've expressed my self this carefully and as verbose. You are inclined to do these irrational actions, you have shown that in the past. Then came Baby Arm along, and with one snappy remark, all my efforts were in vain.
Vault Dweller said:
I'll let other admins know of this crisis situation.
That's your words, and you are the one acting like it is one, despite all the funny remarks in this reply.
Vault Dweller said:
Role-Player said:
Isn't that a bit too high school drama, VD? If you wanted to appease someone or concede a point all you needed to do was to clarify you were Vince in the interview - there was no need to rub out the AoD bits from the interview, specially since it's likely an interesting game for indie gamers and a good thing for the scene itself.
It's not about appeasing people or conceding points, RP. I did something that some people thought was wrong or tacky, as baby arm put it. I didn't expect such a reaction, as I saw the situation differently, but I had to deal with it somehow. In this particular case, I was either right (or at least not wrong), in which case no action was required, or wrong, in which case there was only one way to fix it.
Clarifying wouldn't have changed anything.
You're right in the sense that the ones already offended probably won't come back. But changing it will make all those average people, (who I've been talking about all along) that don't monitor RPGwatch or NMA or The Codex 24/7 hitting F5 every ten seconds, not be offended by it. And besides, it's not like it's just the regulars who dig in the Codex-archives. Further changing it could have shown that you didn't take all of this personally, and are able to handle some constructive criticism (whitch this is, dammit). If anything, this "drama", could lead to increased traffic, and changing the interview might even warrant and update on sites like RPGWatch or NMA. If they didn't update, you could even send a request for them to do so. Contrary to what you seemingly believe, things
can be undone on the Internet. To a certain degree, at least.
For closure let me just say that I hope you put the AoD-parts up, they were both informative and contributed to the interview as a whole. Your intentions for this has been clear for all the regulars, including me, since the beginning. And it wasn't them I was worried about, which also should have been clear since the beginning. And lastly another *sigh* and:
You are going a long way for just not clarifying your role in the interview here, mister.