To anyone who has been following the "Memory loss from death" thread, you're no doubt aware of the negative comments I made. I'll admit; many of these were written in anger and communicated something other than what I had intended. This post is both an apology for my poor behavior and an effort to more clearly communicate what I meant by those statements.
Players are not idiots, and game masters are not gods. My intention with this post was to illustrate the difference in perspective and how it can affect rulings. As in Bruce Almighty, the example I used, it's impossible to make everyone happy, even with the power to change whatever you want. Likewise, players aren't always in the best position to determine what will create the most fun, for themselves or the game as a whole. This doesn't mean you should be ignored, only that we'd be doing the game a disservice to take what you say you want without a grain of salt.
The Solar folks are not loud and angry. These statements should rightfully have been in a post all their own, because they were intended as a general point of consideration for the future, not an attack on one group. Arguments are not conducive to a good game, and I feel it would be unfair to let those who are more argumentative to have a greater say in the rules. Likewise, I do not believe majority rule, or the prospect that someone need only threaten to leave to get their way, are healthy for the game. None of these things can become factors in the rule-making process without setting the precedent that they're valid ways of getting things done.
Listening and ruling the way you want are two different things. I actually said this one more or less the way I wanted it. These two things are connected, but ultimately, Nick and I may listen to your every point and rule against your proposal anyway. Again, we are listening. We want and value your feedback. But we're not always going to implement the solution you propose. As above, it doesn't matter how many people agree with it, or how many times you reiterate it. All that matters is the long-term health of the game. In that way, one convincing argument from a single person is more effective than 100 people endorsing the same solution that we've already ruled out.
Nick and Thad are not perfect. Me in particular. I'll let you in on a secret: I pitched my game system to others for about two years before a very smart redhead clued me in to the fact that if I wanted it, I had to own it. I think my technical acumen is great, and has helped bring the game as far as it has. But my people skills? Clearly not so much. All I can say is I'm doing my best in spite of the fact that I never really wanted to be in charge. Nick and Jessi do their best to keep me from making an ass of myself, but there is, unfortunately, no filter between me and the magic website. All I can ask is that you trust us to have the game's best interests at heart.
For whatever it's worth at this juncture, I apologize for anything I said that may have been construed as insulting, demeaning, or belittling. It wasn't intended that way, although the way I said it understandably made it seem so. Let me be clear; you guys, the players, are the game's greatest resource. We'd be nothing without you.
If everyone is willing, I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on these issues. How can we better serve our loyal customers?