|
MizSuz -> RE: High Protocol Board (7/14/2004 5:48:06 AM)
|
I'm rather surprised that there haven't been more 'pro' high protocol folks jumping in. We've certainly been hit over the head enough with it to date. Maybe if we called it 'gorean'? <shrug> I'm not one of the high protocol people, so I really don't know what makes them tick.
As for Bailey's notion of having such parties and letting them evolve, I think perhaps she and I are twins on another plane of existance. When I had my studio I put a call out to folks asking how many would be interested in the occasional "gorean" party, high protocol rules, etc. The responses were amazingly sparse, considering the number of folks who professed to come to the scene via gor. I too thought that allowing it to evolve was a good idea. But then, most of my parties are set up that way and always have been.
I never posted dungeon monitors/master/mistresses. I did, however, have people who were always around and willing to pitch in when something was needed. My parties were, to my mind, incredibly successful. I often had to limit participation to 70 due to space limitations and would always end up with 10 to 15 crashers anyway. I count that as successful. Anyway, I tried to set the tone by my mode of participation, which is quite relaxed and welcoming. These parties always took on a life of their own. Sometimes I'd have 40 people having a fabulous time and nobody would play, other times I'd have 15 people there and some of the most incredible and edgy play would crop up. The times with 80 or so folks always seemed to be a pleasant mix.
My point is that allowing groups to define themself works very well for me. But if those who would like something to be this way or that way don't speak up then how is anyone to know what their preferences are?
Perhaps it's ("it" being a place for high protocol on collarme) not as important as we (or I, if you prefer) have been led to believe (which is fine by me).
|
|
|
|
