Current mood:	E-V-O-L
Current music:	"Bad"-- Michael Jackson

Apparently, Even the Undead can Wank Now...
... And to think, we all used to think fans of Vampire: the Masquerade were really a nice, peaceable bunch.

What happens when an actual game developer (Justin Achilli) barges into a not-completely-flattering conversation about him in the Nocturnis.net forums?

http://www.nocturnis.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=6064&s=36b9df7673bba5e46dc4d9eaa6af282c

Concentrated Wankery, that's what! Though even I can't decide whether Achilli or the "adoring fans of work" were wankier.

Achilli did say this to criticism about one of his books:
"Isabel could have been more" is not a valid criticism. Yes, it's a valid expression of your personal tastes, but an novel I write is never going to reflect your tastes. You might as well take Star Wars to task because you really wanted Indiana Jones to have a greater role in it.

Apparently he thinks criticism is never valid unless... it isn't an expression of personal tastes? What? (BTW-- I was the person who made that "personal opinion"-- Marzipan.)

and

Maryuoh, you're actually why I don't bother much with ELN anymore. Too much posturing here and not enough actual content. There's a guy over in another thread complaining about how our games are "inconsistent," and had all his points countered by actual quotes from books. So much pissing and pessimism -- I usually frequent forums where the people don't spend so much time bitching about the things that ostensibly entertain them. Then again, it's easy to complain.

But his adoring fans did say things such as:

fabiolen: "About time someone punched him in the face a few times."

Insomniac: "Wow. I insulted you last summer on ELN and all I got was some Mod telling me to shut up. Does this mean you like Fabio more than you like me?"

And well... plenty more insults carefully crafted in passive-agressive language, since suddenly insulting Justin Achilli or his work became carefully monitered by him and the mods...

This is a very intricate and hard to understand wank... but I was told it's a good case of Ebert's law in action, so I just had to submit it to y'all.

Also, bonus self-wank. I thought it was too small to go into I_Wank, so I'm including it here. It starts at the end of page 8 at this thread.
http://www.nocturnis.net/forums/index.php?s=e6f7bea3dae299d6166a024a0cec18d8&act=ST&f=2&t=6047&st=105

I (Marizpan) said (after 3 pages of pointless argument):
Okay. I think I'm just going to stop arguing with you because I think I've already refuted all of your points, and you've already refuted mine. We've laid our poistions down the line and we're not going to budge at this point... In any case, it certainly was nice talking with you and hippie jesus over there. K thnx bye.

To Which SirGrvsaLot Replied:
...
This is a response to my response to your misrepresentation of my argument. You "refute" my post by picking the most trifling and inconsequential thing imaginable. Please.

Since you forfeit, I declare myself the winner of this argument.

And then every thing blowed the fook up.

Enjoy the carnage people!

(Post a new comment)

	mariagoner 2003-12-11 05:04 am UTC (link)
	Ooops... I think I should lj-cut. Can some one show me how? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	cheyinka 2003-12-11 05:07 am UTC (link)
	At the beginning, do <lj-cut text="whatever you want the link to say"> and then at the end do </lj-cut> (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mariagoner 2003-12-11 05:10 am UTC (link)
	Ah... Thank you! (Reply to this)(Parent)

	yadda 2003-12-11 05:39 am UTC (link)
	Multiwank! It's like a four course meal. Appetizer of spicy game wank to start out with, then the main course, a classic criticism wank with decadent developer topping, followed by a light signature wank salad and finished with a little whipped "I hate that mod" for dessert. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	seventy_three 2003-12-11 05:40 am UTC (link)
	Oh, great, now I'm hungry. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	mariagoner 2003-12-11 05:55 am UTC (link)
	And with continual garnishes by a chef that can't leave well enough alone! Heh. Great metaphor, by and by! (Reply to this)(Parent)

lauren
2003-12-11 06:13 am UTC (link)

I got to page five before I gave up.

Good LORD. Seeing this guy get plebey about criticism (valid or not, whatever) makes me think of the time when Chuck Austen called all of his detractors morons who didn't understand his creative vision, and said that everyone but six people on the internet loved him. (*wins the FW award for longest sentence ever*)

Only at least Chuck Austen said it in an article instead of dragging it out on a message forum. x___x

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	mariagoner 2003-12-11 06:33 am UTC (link)
	::hands shining trophy for such:: Yes. And if anyone can please tell me what criticism he would ever accept, please try and do so. I'm still puzzling over that one. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	iczer6 2003-12-11 06:53 am UTC (link)
	I'm guessing he defines 'criticisim' as another term for 'ass-kissing', so unless your lips are planted firmly on his butt he ain't interested. Icz (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	mariagoner 2003-12-11 06:59 am UTC (link)
	Aaaaaaaah! It all makes sense now. ...Goddman. I'm so tempted to hie off to the hinterlands of that forum and inform everyone there of that fact. But I might get banned so... (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	smo 2003-12-11 04:26 pm UTC (link)
	Valid criticism = salad-tossing. Gotcha. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	chibicurmudgeon 2003-12-11 07:01 am UTC (link)
	... And to think, we all used to think fans of Vampire: the Masquerade were really a nice, peaceable bunch. Haha, you weren't witness to some of the games I was involved in. They merited posting in this community. And bad_rpgers_suck. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	darkrose 2003-12-11 07:09 am UTC (link)
	fangirls your icon (Reply to this)(Parent)

	darkrose 2003-12-11 07:03 am UTC (link)
	... And to think, we all used to think fans of Vampire: the Masquerade were really a nice, peaceable bunch. blinks What on earth made you think that? It's White Wolf: The Angsting, after all, started by a man who has to put a dot in his name rather than a hypen to make himself even more kewl and speshul. (Reply to this)(Thread)

mariagoner
2003-12-11 07:34 am UTC (link)

Sorry for giving you the wrong impression... I was sorta trying to make an in-joke about how bitchy most of Vampire's fans (I almost typed fangs!!) really are. ::sheepish grin::

And to see more pro-active bitching about how uselessly and stupidly angsty Vampire can be, try going go the next link, which leads you into a wanky thread about that.

Though you better watch out for that man-bitch SirGrvsALot. He's like the classic goth "Everything must fall into the darkness!" type.

Oh yeah. We wanked all over each other. I don't much like him.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	mariagoner 2003-12-11 07:38 am UTC (link)
	What on earth made you think that? It's White Wolf: The Angsting, after all, started by a man who has to put a dot in his name rather than a hypen to make himself even more kewl and speshul. And sorry, but I don't know that bit of trivia. Who was that? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	darkrose 2003-12-11 08:16 am UTC (link)
	Mark Rein*Hagen. And yes that's how his name is printed (only with a graphical dot instead of an asterisk) in the original player's guide. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	*shuffles toe in dirt* serai 2003-12-11 07:18 am UTC (link)
	Uh, I'm new to the wankery universe, so could someone recite Ebert's Law for me? (Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: *shuffles toe in dirt*

mariagoner
2003-12-11 07:35 am UTC (link)

Q: What is 'Ebert's Law'?
A: When you ask somebody to try their own hand at something before criticizing your efforts, you have violated Ebert's Law and lost the argument. Roger Ebert is not a filmmaker, but he knows what he likes and doesn't, and has every right to say so. Similarly, people don't need to be chefs to recognize a good restaurant, or musicians to appreciate a symphony.

From: PotterSue's FAQ. http://www.livejournal.com/users/pottersues/68705.html

Hope that helps!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: shuffles toe in dirt serai 2003-12-11 08:04 am UTC (link)
	Ah! Yes, thanks. Kind of reminds me of the Gadfly Principle: just because you don't have the answer to a problem doesn't mean you should shut up about the problem's existence. Pointing it out may prompt someone else to suggest the solution. :) (Reply to this)(Parent)

You don't say
(Anonymous)
2003-12-11 07:51 am UTC (link)

Justin Achilli actually didn't act that unreasonable in the thread. I'm not saying he was perfectly well-behaved, but his actions were largely justifiable, if not advisable for a game's developer. The people that really irritated me were the sycophants who made it a business to kiss Achilli's ass and attack anyone who dared slight their precious Dark Prince (examples of ass kissers would be Medea and J. Edward).

When I told Medea not to get lost, I was referring to inside of Achilli's ass. I felt I shouldn't clarify that, however, as the mods were already getting nervous about the thread. That site's got some serious censorship issues.

I will say that while Achilli's action were justified, he should still take the stance, as the game's developer and representative, to treat all complaints politely, even those that don't deserve it. I think a great example of this would be Mark Rosewater, one of the current developers of Magic: the Gathering. He takes great efforts to always respond politely to all comments, even those that I'm sure he, as any other human, must long to flame in response to. Developers aren't saints, but it's good for their company if they pretend to be. It's also a bit naive to go onto a forum for the game you're developer of, announce who you are, and not expect any negative feedback. If he had wanted to get unbiased and reasonable conversation going about his game, he could have simply posted anonymously. Of course the second you announce who you are in that situation, people will start bitching to you about everything they dislike in the game.

Ebert's law, hmmm? I like that.

- Maryuoh, Layabout, Handyman, and poster on Nocturnis.net

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: You don't say

mariagoner
2003-12-11 07:59 am UTC (link)

Meh. Still don't agree with you, Maryuoh. Achilli might have been justified in defending himself but he did wank pretty badly with that "criticism" thing.

I mean... what the hell did he want from me? I told him I thought his book was bad... and he seemingly becomes fixated on defending it.

He tells me its won awards. He tells me what I said is only "opinion" and not "valid criticism." He tells me that that opinion isn't significant because, gee howdy, lots of other people loved his writing.

So while he might not mean to say it, it still comes off like he thinks my individual opinion isn't important simply because its outweighed by thousands of more positive opinion.

If that doesn't make you think a man has some sort of complex about negative criticism, I don't know what will.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: You don't say

goldchaosdragon
2003-12-11 07:49 pm UTC (link)

It's actually a strength of a game development team to have a good, open relationship with the players of said game. The In Nomine List is a perfect example of this. However, unlike Mr. Achilli, the game developers on the IN List (the ones in actual employ of SJ Games are Beth McCoy and EDG, who are the line editor and the guru of internet resources, respectively, with a lot of other IN writers who freelance work in) actually do listen to the criticisms and complaints about the system and make copious notes for the next edition (In fact, after some argument it's been acknowledged that the combat system currently sucks). Because if your players are unhappy with the game, it's just not going to sell as well as you hoped. That's intelligent business practice.

And as for the novels and their badness, he wanks worse than Anne Rice does. Just because a book sold well doesn't mean that all the copies weren't disposed of half-read by disappointed readers. And his actions.. it's like watching a BNF at work. Totally unprofessional.

Just my $0.02...

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: You don't say mariagoner 2003-12-11 08:11 pm UTC (link)
	Justin Achilli X Random Internet BNF. A match made in heaven! (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: You don't say

mariagoner
2003-12-11 08:16 pm UTC (link)

And also... I have the feeling that Vampire: the ~~Wankerade~~ Masquerade is one of the best-selling RPG games out there, which makes some of its developers more than a little reckless in dealing with their public.

I suppose most of them simply figure that no matter how badly they start developing the game ~~like with that godawful end of the world bullshit they're pulling now~~ people will still buy it.

Sad fact is... they may be right.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	(Anonymous) 2003-12-11 08:10 am UTC (link)
	I think he was probably pissed off by your opening remark, "Roit. I want to know too, since I know nothing about him other than he wrote a few bad novels set in the World of Darkness, and likes the Ventrue a great deal." I think initially classifying them as "the guy who writes bad books" is going to put a lot of people on the defensive. (Reply to this)(Thread)

mariagoner
2003-12-11 08:30 am UTC (link)

I clarified that remark later. I didn't mean all his writing-- in fact, I like his clan books. I thought his clan novels were terrible though.

And I'd like to add that when I made that (not especially insulting) remark, I didn't know he was going to suddenly pop up, like a vengeful jack-in-the-box.

And I like to think I was perfectly polite and respectful to him later, when I did know he was there. If he was on the defensive originally, he really ought to have gotten off of it later.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

harukami
2003-12-11 10:14 am UTC (link)

Hmm, he did get overly defensive and all, but I do think this belongs over in i_wank, small or not. My current system of measurement for that is "are the comments on F_W likely to start with 'I think your comment had it coming' or 'I think his reply to you was over the top'", because at that point, it's pretty clear that you're bringing it because it's wanky, but you also don't have a mostly or even semi-unbiased viewpoint in bringing it in.

If that makes sense, anyway?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

mariagoner
2003-12-11 05:56 pm UTC (link)

Hmmm... Sorry, but I disagree with you. I made one or two innocous comments about not liking a book and Achilli sorta grabbed onto them for a moment. Most of the wank, however, involves other people and issues about other books. So I didn't think it should go in I-wank, since I didn't much feature in it.

I did think Justin Achilli was wanky, but I didn't demonstrate it in that forum. When I was talking to Maryuoh (in the comments in f_wank where I was defensive) I was arguing against Justin primarily because Maryuoh was arguing for him. And because he made it seem like I was horribly rude to Justin from the start, which was not the case.

You're right about the bonus wank going into I-wank. However, I didn't want to make a whole seperate entry about that. Too lazy too! :P

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

harukami
2003-12-11 08:32 pm UTC (link)

I have no personal stake in this, and I'm not trying to be rude, but my urge is also to say 'this belongs in i_wank' when the poster felt obliged to reply to nearly every comment in a way that either supported her position or took apart the other guy's. Which, uh, you've done. Not without *reason*, of course, but it's still happened. (By the time I first replied, IIRC, you'd answered *all* comments in that matter). This implies to me that you've got too much of a personal stake in the wank, whether or not you contributed overmuch as it happened.

...Of course, that's the type of thing you can't really tell if you'll have the urge to do until after other people have *posted*, which means it's in F_W already, but.

Anyway, I do agree you mostly managed to avoid wanking in-thread.

(Also, am I just confused? I thought i_wank was for any wank you were involved in just enough to have a personal, biased interest in, not for when you were wanking away yourself and showing it off proudly... did I somehow get confused along the way? It could happen. It's been known to happen.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

mariagoner
2003-12-11 10:26 pm UTC (link)

Oh, it's not because this is I_Wank material. It's just that... I very rarely post anything up myself. Mostly I just comment on other people's journals and communities.

So when I do post things up-- I have a tendency to reply to just about every comment in my post. It's not because I like or dislike anybody in the wank to a special degree.

It's just my personal tic, that's all.

(Reply to this)(Parent)