User blog comment:Ildsjel/An Open Letter/@comment-27612891-20190817053445/@comment-38884057-20190818042657

I’d like to start off by making one thing clear: I agree entirely when you say users finding jobs and attending college is a good part of the reasoning behind DARP’s activity slowing down. However, I disagree with it being the main reasoning; like Time said in his comment, a lot of it has to do with people having a lack of motivation, energy, and even interest. It isn’t necessarily because they’re swamped with work; it’s because people often prefer to devote their time to doing things that are productive or that they find more interest in. I myself have fallen prey to this in past times. That’s the purpose of this blog; to find out what we can do collectively, as a group, to change this and make DARP a more enjoyable place. This isn’t a blog designed to offend anyone or stir negative feelings; it’s a blog written to serve as a conversation starter to decipher why we aren’t as interested or motivated enough to be more consistently active during the free time we have, and what we can do to put this on the mend. When you can’t come to DARP one, two, three days, maybe even weeks, then that’s understandable; life is unpredictable and sometimes you just can’t get to the wiki in time to make any contributions. But when it becomes months where edits are becoming more and more sparse, then we need to start evaluating if there’s more to it and, if so, if there’s anything we can do about it.

To continue, I’d like to ask: why did you interpret my words as though the color scheme was the reason people were leaving? That isn’t what I was referring to, and I would have thought that’d be easy to figure out. Sometimes, a makeover is all it takes for people to feel refreshed. Personally, I’d feel a little more invigorated to continue contributing to the wiki if the appearances were more up to date, or even on par with special events or seasons, like other users have been suggesting. Moving on, I’d like to address your second point. Like I mentioned above, I agree with you: a big reason why DARP’s activity is declining is because people have, as you put it, actual lives. I’d like to reiterate, however, what I said in the paragraph above: a decline in activity within two, three weeks is one thing. When it’s a month of sparse edits, that’s when things start getting rough and people should begin re-evaluating whether the responsibilities they’ve undertaken, let it be in the administration team or outside it, is too much. Roleplaying is a hobby, and I agree; some people can devote more time to it than others. But when it gets to a point that hardly anyone is devoting barely anything at all for extended periods of time, red flags will start going up. Like you, I’d love to roleplay more, and I’d love to put more effort into the wiki. Like you, sometimes I find myself unable to because RPs have stagnated or because I’m suddenly overwhelmed with schoolwork and responsibilities with my family and friends. Moving on, I’d like to make a disclaimer: I cannot apologize for the way anyone perceives my words. I made myself blatantly clear in my blog, and if anyone would like to disagree with that, then that’s not my responsibility. I say this because from what I’m currently understanding is that you misinterpreted the purpose of this blog. I’m not faulting aesthetics in the same way I’m not faulting users for being committed to their real lives. The purpose of this blog is to begin conversations regarding why DARP is stagnating and how we can fix it. Frankly, I find it upsetting anyone might think I’m pinning any blame at all, when I made it clear several times this isn’t personal nor is it an attack. It’s a blog designed to navigate any shortcomings DARP might have, any areas we could improve in, any problems we could be having interpersonally that could be hindering our ability to progress here.

Moving on, I cannot claim to have written an impartial blog and proceed to not acknowledge any points you might have. You raised a very fair one by creating the spreadsheet, which likely took extensive research, so I applaud you for achieving such a feat. However, I’d like to remind everyone the purpose of this blog wasn’t to critique anyone, or even blame the administration team. As you all well read, I structured the blog to ask a series of questions, regardless of what they correlated to. If you decided my asking whether it had to do with the administration team was offensive, then that’s your prerogative. However, that wasn’t why I wrote this blog, and would genuinely appreciate if people began focusing on the bigger picture instead of the more hurtful parts. I tried to remain as objective as possible, and I lament the fact that there is anyone who could put that into question. Also, I did mention other communities, but again, I did not do so with any malicious intent. I did so to point out that if other communities have managed to remain active and relatively hassle-free, then we by all means should be capable of the same thing. I did not accuse any wiki of trying to “direct activity away”, “compete with DARP”, or “be DARP 2.0”. Like I said, I was simply pointing out if anybody else could do it, so could we. I myself have made several of these other roleplaying communities, and like yours, they were not created to divert attention from DARP. These questions were carefully designed to raise awareness and leave users thinking about potential reasons why activity could be falling and what we could do to either slow this process down or stop it altogether.

When it comes to new users, I’d like to say I agree with you completely. As you said, lest a new user have preexisting relations or is quick to join any one clique, group, or collection of users, then they’re typically left in the dust. That’s one of the main reasons, I would say, why DARP has been stagnant. I’m glad we both agree we have these issues. :)

To close off this already extensive response, I’d like to point out a comment I found to be unfair. Saying I “sound somewhat conceited” and that some of my text “can come off as if you’re solely responsible for making sure DARP becomes active again” is hurtful. Regardless of whether you agree or not, I find it to be a weak attempt at manipulating this blog into something malicious when it wasn’t written that way. It’s unfortunate you found yourself feeling uncomfortable or attacked, but that wasn’t my intention and I made it as clear as I could during the course of the letter. Not once did I claim I was the only one responsible for DARP. Not once did I try to label myself as anything. As a matter of fact, I didn’t name anybody. I tried to remain as impartial as I could. If you couldn’t see that, then honestly… I don't think there’s nothing else I could do.