I wouldn't mind loyalty decaying over time.
-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
NEWS Transcript of the Catskills Meeting with Mesanna and Kryonix
It's already the case that someone with 50 accounts has 50 times the votes of someone holding just a single account. Someone like Storm with a gazillion accounts (maybe only 2/3 of a gazillion now?) deserves to have that multiple of benefit.
We've been over the math in previous threads, and one vote per shard was to prevent a dominant guild from seizing control of several cities. After four election cycles, is cross-shard logrolling still a problem? If so, the easiest way to counter it is one vote per account, regardless of someone's playstyle (RP or otherwise). Perhaps voting could be tied to the last time a character was logged in, like holiday gifts are, but I don't see that as a significant burden. There's unfortunately nothing I can conceive of that stops gaming the system without doing some harm; the question is finding what causes the least amount of harm.
That is something we undeniably agree on Flutter.
Okay but just like you do not WANT a house on GL, I don't WANT to go to other servers. I chose Catskills, that's it ... that's all I WANT.
Bottom line is either way you are going to have people that disagree, but honestly its the lesser of two evils with residency requirements. Think about my example or the example of Lady Storm above. If you restrict it to only "house holding accounts" those numbers are drastically reduced. From 85 to 39 for one guild. Anyone that makes friends like you do could easily beat out 39 votes on their own shards. Some folks are either not good at "making friends" (I have a ton of folks like that --- many have social anxieties etc.) or just do not wish to. Are we to punish them for their social inaptitude? I find that worse than allowing some folks with monetary ability to have more votes.
Speaking of house holding accounts.... PGoH has a sleuth of them! Dot Warner for "City of Britain" on GL also has a sleuth of them! The rares and house traders --- like Nails --- have a ton of accounts too! The RP cities in Atlantic alone could throw out massive amounts of votes! I am not the only one BY FAR with several accounts like that. It is more common for guilds to have this situation so I feel that evens a lot out in some shards. And believe me in online gaming, the situation of folks that have a lot of trouble making friends is certainly very common as well. Again ... its the lesser of two evils.
The only solution to all of this is to completely remove the voting process, like you said. We are a MONARCHY in UO.... not a DEMOCRACY. If that was true, let me freaking vote for a new King!!! I say folks "nominate themselves" to Governor roles and the King picks the one with the best "sales pitch"!
And this ^ .... yes please.
I can hear the cries of favoritism already over having the "King" selecting governors. Even if there were strict, objective criteria to be met before one was eligible for selection, people would complain. As flawed as it is, this faux democratic approach is the least objectionable.
- Awards
- 1
I am totally for the King (EM) choosing his court.
I am not only for it I may rally and cause a big stink, the shards should all have EMs.
These EMs should be more participatory with the people of their shards. (some are not knocking them)
The EMs should get to know people, their alts, their playstyles.
The EMs should be at RP events, PVP harrowers, and generally just PLAY with us in one fashion or another.
Visit us while we are wacking away at Navery. Stop by the pub for a drink with the RPers. Come to our in game run auctions and hang out watch the pvp in yew or
the fight over the despise spawn.
Learn who we are and how we play and become a part of our shard.
Then we should nominate each other and the King should decide.
And anyone who cries about "favoritism" can STICK IT UP THEIR ASSES.
The game would be so much more enriched if we had this. I am so PRO-EM involvement that I can hardly stand it.
People should not apply to be EMs unless they are willing to play with us, are interested in playing with us, and have our best interests at heart.
I really believe @Mesanna cares about this. I know she doesn't have time to baby-sit the EMs. It is OUR JOB as community members of our shards to let her know.
We NEED this sort of thing.
I am not only for it I may rally and cause a big stink, the shards should all have EMs.
These EMs should be more participatory with the people of their shards. (some are not knocking them)
The EMs should get to know people, their alts, their playstyles.
The EMs should be at RP events, PVP harrowers, and generally just PLAY with us in one fashion or another.
Visit us while we are wacking away at Navery. Stop by the pub for a drink with the RPers. Come to our in game run auctions and hang out watch the pvp in yew or
the fight over the despise spawn.
Learn who we are and how we play and become a part of our shard.
Then we should nominate each other and the King should decide.
And anyone who cries about "favoritism" can STICK IT UP THEIR ASSES.
The game would be so much more enriched if we had this. I am so PRO-EM involvement that I can hardly stand it.
People should not apply to be EMs unless they are willing to play with us, are interested in playing with us, and have our best interests at heart.
I really believe @Mesanna cares about this. I know she doesn't have time to baby-sit the EMs. It is OUR JOB as community members of our shards to let her know.
We NEED this sort of thing.
I am pro-EM involvement as well, I simply recognize the fact that there are limits. Broadsword is unlikely to pay for the hours it would require to truly get to know a shard's populace. Most EMs are also unlikely to want to devote the time it would require either, I'm sure they'd like to have lives and recreational time on their own schedule. We can't expect them to let it be eaten up by UO.
- Awards
- 1
Kelmo you shall be an EM...
Riyana
Operations
Administrator
Professional
Governor
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
Event Coordinator
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
The numbers Pandora quoted were mostly her friends...
Everyone is free to make friends on multiple shards, yes. But those friends shouldn't swarm shards they don't play to rig an election that doesn't affect them.
So you say you shouldn't be able to run on Drachenfels because you don't play there? I agree!! But you CAN run on Drachenfels. You CAN win there with your pals from other shards jumping over to boost you. In fact, you could run in as many cities as you have accounts and win all of them. THAT is the problem. I doubt you and I are going to come to an agreement on this issue, but I think you just made my point.
The once every three months paying to keep a house up thing shouldn't be allowed either. Relevant given the course of the conversation I suppose, but a whole different issue.
40 hours of game play would just get macro'd away and we'd still be in the same place.
While I don't disagree per se with the idea that the king should choose his court, it would be an absolute nightmare for the EMs. The favoritism accusations would be flying left and right. The recent drama would be nothing in comparison.
True about what Mesanna and Kyronix said, if unfortunate. So let's think about other options. What about a cap of, say, 5 votes per account, usable on any shard? You could vote only on your own shard or on other shards and you could still vote for a few of your friends or favorites, but you'd have to pick. The stipulations you suggest aren't bad either, though I'm not sure how other than items my crafter is going to get loyalty.
- Awards
- 1
I'm not saying they have to spend all day with us, but they should know who we are, participate with us, and so forth. I would do this without pay, and I know quite a few other people who would do so as well. Even some EMs who are already doing this because of their own desire to want to know their shard.
I whole-heartedly agree that EMs should get more involved with a shard's communities outside their own events. Some do and that's great! Most don't and its sad. I've watched several shard's council meetings now and its depressing just how one-sided most of them felt. Blackthorn could have been a sock puppet run by a mongbat, as UNinteractive as he was.
While you might go above and beyond your hours if you were an EM, you can't expect them all to. In fact, Mesanna can neither require nor even casually suggest they do so. Should they, I bet they get a big "YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN!" lecture. I'm pretty sure she's not about to jeopardize her pet project by letting it slip down a legal rabbit hole.
BoD's are the most obvious solution to gaining loyalty on a crafter. My own crafter is adored off only BoD's. By items I was mainly thinking about the ingots/boards that are the preferred method of gaining loyalty at the moment. The 5 votes thing isn't bad either though and does avoid a bit of the hassle of my proposal. The main difference being that mine would require a certain amount of playing the shard while yours wouldn't. Which isn't necessarily bad.
- Awards
- 1
Seeing as how they are interviewing for unpaid seers again, I am hoping these seers will be working hand in hand with our "paid" EMs (its really a token of appreciation) and accomplish something real here. It needn't be a "your own your own" lecture at all. In fact those who go above and beyond should be rewarded somehow.
Counselors and Seers are two very different set of tasks. I do not think they are re-instating Seers, are they? Seers are basically EM's that are focused more on the community and the people of the community rather than lore-based Events. It was Seers that used to be the decision makers for "blessed" cities, back in the day.
- Awards
- 1
Sorry my mistake, they are hiring counselors. I frequently make mistakes right now I am recovering very slowly from surgery. Apologies.
Either way, I believe if an EM applies for a job, the EM should be prepared to put in the time. I have been to a lot of events on a lot of shards, even shards where my characters aren't exactly "developed" just to watch. I know for a fact some EMs are not putting in the effort. You too busy with life? Just don't apply for such extra curricular activites in the first place. (by "you" I don't mean "you")
With one vote per account, players can support each other on any shard they want, including those they don't play on, just that they lose the opportunity to do something meaningful on their "main" shard(s).
Well, the time is chiefly to allow for account payment problems. To a lesser extent, it's a comfort for players who quit, that they have a few months to come back without losing a sentimental housing spot. Otherwise, quitting UO becomes more one-way.
Could it be 60 days? Thirty? Maybe, but every so often we hear of someone with a serious billing problem. I'd hate to see someone who's played for 5 or 10 years quit forever when he doesn't get a new credit card in time or has billing problems, and his main account holding a castle goes poof.
Human nature being what it is, I have no doubt it would devolve into favorites, and I doubt TPTB would expend any manpower to review actions and complaints. This was my experience from many years back:
A certain seer may have started out with good intentions, but he ultimately got so full of himself and made every event revolve around him and his select friends. If players want to RP that way, fine, they already can on their own, but it's clearly wrong for them to do that one has special powers to create items and mobiles. Those of us on the evil side -- like WL, I and others, later Lich Soulstealer -- most definitely had roles to contribute but were never invited. But even those who RPd knights and paladins, who were above being complete sycophants, were cannon fodder at best. One of of my friends summarized a quest I missed: "Same old thing, everybody stood around to watch him do something." It discouraged newcomers from even trying and ultimately drove away old-timers, thus ensuring after a while that anyone even thinking to tag along was the seer's friend. The biggest nonsense was fighting G'Thunk, only to have one of his friends, who had been standing back doing zilch, fire one arrow for a huge killing shot. And players think it's bad today to deal a lot damage without getting credit!
So I vote to stick with player votes. There can and still be favoritism and cliques, but at least it's people who are paying for accounts and have reason to be at least a little judicious about casting a vote, as opposed to an EM who likely won't be better acquainted with the players. How will an EM choose, a ja'chug ceremony to prove one's worthiness? (Klingon reference there.)
I could go for this. Five maximum sounds good, even three, and it's technically feasible. The counter could be held on the housing server.
- Awards
- 1
Case in point.I wish I was an EM just so I could play with everyone like that
I feel the same way Norrar.
And I'd do it for free.
EMs are what the Seers were, more or less. What they're talking about bringing back is Counselors, who can't even pick anything up, and at most will be able to teleport stuck players. They are CS, not entertainment.
I'm sure Mesanna already rewards EMs who go above and beyond with praise, but rewarding them otherwise is walking a razor's edge. If she rewards one that does it, she'd have to reward them all, thus potentially slipping into murky legal areas.
I'm sure Mesanna already rewards EMs who go above and beyond with praise, but rewarding them otherwise is walking a razor's edge. If she rewards one that does it, she'd have to reward them all, thus potentially slipping into murky legal areas.
I never saw a difference beyond the name, perhaps in specific powers, but their general function of running events (quests or otherwise) and organizing RP always seemed the same to me.
- Awards
- 1
Murkey legal areas?
You reward people for good service. Like a tip. There's no legal matters. It would more than likely be pixles. Which in essence would be still owned by EA anyway.
I do roll my eyes when people start bringing up "legal" matters. No offense Dot. Good EMs should get rewarded. Bad EMs who even TRY to complain would have the whole shard to "testify" against him in a court lol. Have mercy. "Legal areas" oh my.
You reward people for good service. Like a tip. There's no legal matters. It would more than likely be pixles. Which in essence would be still owned by EA anyway.
I do roll my eyes when people start bringing up "legal" matters. No offense Dot. Good EMs should get rewarded. Bad EMs who even TRY to complain would have the whole shard to "testify" against him in a court lol. Have mercy. "Legal areas" oh my.
I know you mean well, but I've invested in multiple accounts for over 16 years and enjoy my property that I've come to enjoy as my housing. I like how I can log on this game for 10 minutes or two hours and have some stress relief.
I don't want to see it go because someone saw a chance to make a little $$$$ in a BS court challenge. Working in a corporate environment, I can tell you it requires us to jump hoops just to give someone a $50 gift card to dunkin doughnuts for good work.
- Awards
- 1
Mesanna can give anything she wants to anyone. I don't know why you're comparing real life to a token for a soulstone. I have been given things by devs. Things have been replaced by devs to people for lots of reasons. Giving an EM a xfer token or a token for a soulstone or 5 isn't the same thing and can be done on a whim or in necessity. They aren't going to close UO because of it.
Fine, I'll be blunt then. Performing free work that you would otherwise be paid for at your place of employment is frowned upon by the government. EMs ARE paid contractors. Don't try to call it "volunteering," as at a for-profit company that's outright illegal.
If an EM is under performing the duties stated in their contract, then it is Mesanna's place to dismiss them. Sure a shard can complain about said performance, but its her decision.
If an EM is under performing the duties stated in their contract, then it is Mesanna's place to dismiss them. Sure a shard can complain about said performance, but its her decision.
That is the thing, Messana CAN'T. If she does, she is opening herself up to a lawsuit. They are PAID employees who are under a contract. There have to be measurable variables that other EMs can see and use as a bar to work towards to get those tokens too. That token has monetary value as an incentive. This is why there are HR Depts, not just to hire people, but also to make sure employees know what they can't do so that the company doesn't get sued.
Devs replacing something to you personally because of a game bug or issue isn't even an apple and oranges comparison, it's like comparing apples and trucks.
We all wish Mesanna could do really awesome things to rewards to EMs going out of their way to involve themselves in a shard and making them breathe. No one is arguing against that. We all want it. I desperately wish they would as then maybe Great Lakes would get a little more love other than on Tuesday nights and a random Saturday/Sunday thrown in once a month.
It's just sadly there are people out there that will use it to make cheap/easy money. UO isn't WoW, a lawsuit could severely damage UO to the point the game enters just maintenance mode.
Subjectively, you are correct. The same can be said for many jobs, but really that's an emotional response. Objectively, however, while working more than your allotted hours looks nice to those who see it, it cannot be expected.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 1
A Lawsuit from who?
All it takes is
We all like to think its a privileged to be in such a position. I certainly do. However, that person doesn't have to see it through our eyes and they could, if they wanted to be a dbag about it, cause internal headaches that grow into external threats.
A disgruntled EM.
We all like to think its a privileged to be in such a position. I certainly do. However, that person doesn't have to see it through our eyes and they could, if they wanted to be a dbag about it, cause internal headaches that grow into external threats.
Sorry Flutter, I don't know why we are even debating this..
What was the point of this thread again? Is it here to depress me? Because when I see it, the only thing I think the meeting on Catskills did was successfully scuttle getting the issue of a person on Great Lakes actually causing election grief with abuse of game mechanics addressed. Like Messana is going to really go to GL after that trainwreck.
What was the point of this thread again? Is it here to depress me? Because when I see it, the only thing I think the meeting on Catskills did was successfully scuttle getting the issue of a person on Great Lakes actually causing election grief with abuse of game mechanics addressed. Like Messana is going to really go to GL after that trainwreck.
Basically what im seeing is, UO voting is nothing like real life voting, and theres no way to make it comparable.
We have 2 issues that by themself are unfair and unrealistic.
In real life One person gets one vote.
In UO one person gets as many votes as they can pay for with rlm
In real life you can only vote where you reside, one time
In UO you can vote more than once, but only once where you reside
Both scenerios are totally not like real voting, both unfair, but when combined somehow seem to balance each other out in a messed up kinda way. Which totally fits into the the way UO works with most other things lol.
Last edited:
Thinking more on this, its really sounds ridiculous.
I used to kill someone and chop them up and turn their head in for money. Now we are arguing about voting rights. It really must be the modern age of UO.
In keeping with the original traditions of the game, I propose a new system
There is an election via voting (any voting philosophy would do, someone would win)
In becoming nominated, both nominees (and perhaps the guilds of the nominees) would open themselves to to guild / alliance ruleset. Like a "governors guild"
So at any time the current governor could be simply killed by the opposition if he or she was not liked, or the outcome of some flawed voting system was not approved of.
This would promote RP because the governor would need to realize that as governor he or she is a "high profile" citizen, utilizing the appropiate guards or other means of avoiding assassination attempts.
When the philosophy behind a game mechanic is so looped and twisted it requires in depth arguement, its probably always just best to chop off someones head.
I used to kill someone and chop them up and turn their head in for money. Now we are arguing about voting rights. It really must be the modern age of UO.
In keeping with the original traditions of the game, I propose a new system
There is an election via voting (any voting philosophy would do, someone would win)
In becoming nominated, both nominees (and perhaps the guilds of the nominees) would open themselves to to guild / alliance ruleset. Like a "governors guild"
So at any time the current governor could be simply killed by the opposition if he or she was not liked, or the outcome of some flawed voting system was not approved of.
This would promote RP because the governor would need to realize that as governor he or she is a "high profile" citizen, utilizing the appropiate guards or other means of avoiding assassination attempts.
When the philosophy behind a game mechanic is so looped and twisted it requires in depth arguement, its probably always just best to chop off someones head.
Riyanna ........ I do understand the reason I said 2 or 3 GM skills is because quite frankly I can go out and pay an NPC for 40 skill points in several skills even if they are stupid useless skills just to suit the requirement of having X amount of points... Otherwise I had considered saying they needed at least 500 points... but then I remembered when this was done for something before and most folk just bought up stupid skills. Hence my saying they needed to be Veterans..... not as in they need to have played for X number of years but you can be new and still have 2 or 3 GM skills. And really it would apply just to voting.... not to using the trade deal... I would think anyone loyal ought to be able to use the trade deal. But no just to vote you should have 2 or 3 GM skills. This would seriously make voting on other shards no longer a snap. Yes one could have tons of mostly worked characters here and there but honestly they would be few and far between.
I really can't say as I know the answer to making it "Fair" .... What I can say is having been a Governor since the beginning... It's really not all it's cracked up to be. Unless you like attending meetings... and paying out large sums of money every week.... then really it's pretty darned disappointing. The chances that you will make a suggestion and get approval are slim to none. Mostly it's just a title and gold sink, with some RP and meetings thrown in. Honestly I can't think of a single reason why anyone outside of the RP community would even care.... besides the trade deal which if you think about it most of them are pretty lame and otherwise not very useful.
I just wish that folk could chose to contribute to the trade deal if they want to use it and then I would HIGHLY prefer if folk using it got to chose what they wanted ..... since honestly I have 3 folk in Yew who want a trade deal and each and every one of them want something else. Those are the only ones that have "said" what they wanted. When I put up a ballot box (Which I can't seem to do anymore).... only 2 people bothered to vote... so I rather doubt anyone really uses the trade deal anyway... I'd like to be able to see just how many are actually utilizing the thing.
Eliminate voting an have the King randomly select the governors. Like I said this is a monarchy not a democracy. End of discussion. Governors either do the job right or they are replaced.
While I don't like the way elections have devolved recently, I can't agree with taking the interactivity out of the system. Lose more interactivity and the system will continue the downward spiral its been on. Out of all the shards, there are only 4 fully seated councils. Thats a pathetic percentage.
When the system was originally announced, I was largely against it, for many of the reasons that have come out since; voting just doesn't really work online, due to all the associated issues of technology and identity... and as such even now, I don't think the idea can be "saved" in any way here, not when it hasn't be saved anywhere else online. You only have to look at the self-selecting of data and polls, and freeping of some in turn in the last US Presidential election to see how the modern age generates false conclusions in even the most important of situations; You're seeing it in the Scottish Independence vote now in the UK too... a simple, aging MMO is just not well placed to tackle these global issues at all, really.
It can perhaps be made a bit better though; not through tackling voting as such, but tackling the quality of candidates.
Consider the case of the cloned applicant we saw recently; instead of just putting your name on a ballot, there ought to be scheduled "Meet the Public" times a candidate has to attend, and answer question from anyone who turns up... let's say for one of 2 different local times per day during the nomination phase, and lock them in a certain spot during that hour. If they don't attend any, off the voting list you go. What if someone turns up and just AFKs? Cant be avoided, but at least the voters could see who was really interested in the role or not... would a griefer with a cloned character have any good answers for an attending public? Unlikely. And if they do? Then you can vote for them, because they gave you answers you liked.
Automating some of their powers would also help; you could lock the candidate into certain things say, such as if they ran on giving one particular boost, they have to declare which one at the stone, and it's automatically selected when they become Governor for them... Where such things can't be enforced, such as "I'm a roleplayer", then a declaration of intent by the candidates name would help, but leave that manifesto hidden until voting starts, to avoid deliberate cloning. Reveal what the player chose, and hopes to do, once voting starts.
Again, these are just suggestions; I've no idea what goes on behind the scenes as such, having given up on trying to run against what has always been a popularity contest myself. But if it must be so, let's try and at least make sure people are genuinely popular and that's why they get elected, rather than try and ask for what is outright impossible, and fix the concept of democracy itself...
It can perhaps be made a bit better though; not through tackling voting as such, but tackling the quality of candidates.
Consider the case of the cloned applicant we saw recently; instead of just putting your name on a ballot, there ought to be scheduled "Meet the Public" times a candidate has to attend, and answer question from anyone who turns up... let's say for one of 2 different local times per day during the nomination phase, and lock them in a certain spot during that hour. If they don't attend any, off the voting list you go. What if someone turns up and just AFKs? Cant be avoided, but at least the voters could see who was really interested in the role or not... would a griefer with a cloned character have any good answers for an attending public? Unlikely. And if they do? Then you can vote for them, because they gave you answers you liked.
Automating some of their powers would also help; you could lock the candidate into certain things say, such as if they ran on giving one particular boost, they have to declare which one at the stone, and it's automatically selected when they become Governor for them... Where such things can't be enforced, such as "I'm a roleplayer", then a declaration of intent by the candidates name would help, but leave that manifesto hidden until voting starts, to avoid deliberate cloning. Reveal what the player chose, and hopes to do, once voting starts.
Again, these are just suggestions; I've no idea what goes on behind the scenes as such, having given up on trying to run against what has always been a popularity contest myself. But if it must be so, let's try and at least make sure people are genuinely popular and that's why they get elected, rather than try and ask for what is outright impossible, and fix the concept of democracy itself...
I don't mind if you own multiple accounts that you get multiple votes.
Should there not be some advantage to hold multiple accounts? By all means this should entitle you to more votes. At least then the people in charge are majority of subscribers.
What I do mind is right now apparently the people on Atlantic get to control all the shards. When they are done voting on Atlantic they just visit every other shard that they have never played.
Should there not be some advantage to hold multiple accounts? By all means this should entitle you to more votes. At least then the people in charge are majority of subscribers.
What I do mind is right now apparently the people on Atlantic get to control all the shards. When they are done voting on Atlantic they just visit every other shard that they have never played.
An EM is already required to work 25 hours a month with their contract. Some EMs have 40 hour full time jobs and don't have time to devote to most of those needs. Some do go above and beyond knowing they wont be paid, but they aren't full time UO employees and you have to remember that. Same goes for Counselors that will likely be required to volunteer about 3 hours a week tops. [Anymore and they hit that legal grey area]
A lot are demanded of them but be realistic and know they have limitations. If you want a full time community person, convince Mesanna to hire some IGM's like the old days to supplement the EM's. IGM [Interest Game Master] Specialized in running the seer programs as well as being full time event staff. That is ALL they did as their job.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 1
If you cannot do the job you shouldn't apply. All of this "EMs can't do this they have real life jobs families pizza delivery in the evenings" or other cop-outs are just that. Cop-outs. If you cannot put in the time.... 25 whole hours a month... then you shouldn't have applied for the "job" in the first place.
I am not saying that EMs are crappy, I LOVE LOVE LOVE EMs. (although a couple of them really are) I am saying that to encourage spectacular service there should/could be extra incentives. There's SO MUCH more our EMs could be doing. People who volunteer for UO play UO anyway (I should hope in some capacity). I could name 5 people that would do it for free right off the top of my head.
Take a trip through the Great Lakes EM event locations created last year for us and then tell me it cannot be done.
If you actually could.. sadly much of what the Great Lakes EMs built will never be appreciated again.
I strongly disagree. The fact is, they are required of them to perform certain tasks and are paid for those tasks for 25 hours constitutes work. Anything above those hours is on a voluntary basis. I don't agree that it's a cop out because people signed up as an EM for the love of the game but let's be realistic, they have real lives too outside of the game, and work and keeping an income to pay the bills frankly comes in first above all else. Most of the EM's volunteer their time above and beyond those 25 hours and they should be commended. But asking, or even demanding of them to put in more work for free crosses that line that UO has had trouble in the past regarding volunteering and making said volunteers work long periods of time for free. I am sure the government would have a field trip over something like that, you would not work for free at your job I bet, or over 40 hours without overtime.
With Counselors coming back soon I will bet that the community will also demand them to be available more and answer their pages at all times, which is fine, some will likely be on 24/7, while others won't. That's the nature of volunteering. But in regards to EM's, as I said before, they are not full time UO staff and should not be treated as such, or such expected of them.
If you want full time community people, ask for an IGM to be hired, or perhaps shift over one or two of the existing GM's to help the EM's out some. Since Counselors are returning to UO they should help lighten the work load of the GM's considerably like in the old days and free them up for other duties, like dealing with scripters and cheaters or helping EM's with their decorating since Mesanna can't do it all herself.