What is the motivation to play a (non-sexual) submissive/supporting role?

Okay, well ... try this
Do everything he asks. And cling very tightly at the right moment. It never fails. In real at least. Not sure about in sl.

It's something I want to do, but it also involves other people. So I would want those other people to want to be involved to.

If they want to be involved, then they would want it to exist.. which would mean they would want to convince me.

If people refuse, reject me, and discourage.. then it's a good sign they never wanted it in the first place, in which case doing it would have been a waste of time.

lol she's trolling you guys and you insist on falling for it

But you have to admit....using different subjects and titles every time....might indicate a "creative flair"....however, simply stating that, means that we would have to go back over the fact that creative flair alone, is not enough.....and the can of worms opens again........

I'm not trolling, just frustrated.

Yes....we are aware of that.

Ah, now something I can address.

Most successful RP areas only provide the backdrop, and allow the participants to create the content and events. RP areas that try to micro-manage what is going on and how it's supposed to be aren't usually successful. (hopes LL is listening)

If you think about it, this is like a miniature model of SL. They provide the tools and let the residents create the world. It just goes one step further, creating the world, and the setting, and letting the participants fill in the rest.

lol but who''s really getting the gift and who's really giving it?

my take?
Submissives not only GET presents, but ARE presents themselves

@Yumi:
the most successful model is to create what you love, and then attract the people that love it too. Quality Live RP is resistant to formulaic models, and will strive to break free. (and a model is not the same thing as a boundary)

I call shenanigans. Especially since this whole thing sounds made up to begin with.

And here's where you really give yourself away:



SO THIS ISN'T EVEN YOUR OPINION? You are arguing and making up straw men stories for the heck of it. Admitted trolling. Kthxbai

Um. "It's a setting that _I_ do like."

".. and I'm only arguing that _others_ would not like it.."

How are those contradictory? My opinion is that I personally like it, but others would not - especially since they wouldn't be in the same position in the social structure.



The problem is that, as we see from our friends with their box clubs, that approach has a 70%+ failure rate.

If you like it, and you saw others enjoying it, then why are you assuming that there are not enough people who do enjoy it to suport a sim? You seem to be just assuming opposition for the sake of an artificial arguement, i.e. trolling.



As I tried to say ealier in the thread, if the teacher does not observe and respond to good RP then the effort will fail. There has to be room for advancement and the teacher needs a long term plan in that regard.

There also has to be more to the sim than just training of apprentices.

Because those people are gone now, and/or didn't want me (as opposed to someone else) to be organizing it.

If you engaged in the same dialouge you have here, I am not surprised. You seem to go out of your way to not just look for but to invent problems.

Ok Yumi,

How about you just go with the flow? You probably cant but just try just try to go and have fun and not analyze everything?

Fun is the thing here in SL one can have if they want it.


Bec

This.

Yumi, you did not say, in the part I quoted, that you were saying you liked it but others didn't. You said you were merely taking that stance in order to debate. You've doubled back and forth in this thread so many times it's like you put your opinions in a taffy machine. You admitted in past threads, too, that you like to argue a point for its own sake, to see if it has merit. But you know what, you don't stop when it doesn't hold water; you just rephrase it. As such, it amounts to idly toying with people for the sake of it, i.e. trolling. I agree with the others who've concluded that.

For one thing, the suggestions that you just go out and try ARE valid, and that you haven't done so yet, shows you'd rather talk about it to infinity rather than try it. And then, to blame others for your decision.

Well, there wasn't any dialogue involved at all. And I don't invent problems, I look ahead for potential issues.



No, I don't "stop when it doesn't hold water"; in most cases it hasn't been disproved. People like to post that _their own_ experiences don't fit with the point, but that's not a disproval: it isn't a general rule and you might be one in a million. Debate is not trolling, trust me!

And I said, "I'm arguing that others wouldn't because it's my side in the debate" to indicate that I believe others wouldn't like it; and that the point that "you don't know, others might like it" isn't useful because the objective is to discover by debate if they would or not.



They are valid, but "just going out and trying" actually fails 70%+ of the time.

Here's the mistake you're making. You're asking questions in a forum called Resident Answers, not Residental Debates. People ask questions, people supply answers. You, on the other hand, ask questions, people answer, you then argue with them for 10 - 20 pages until everyone is sick of it and you've proven nothing other than your idea of a "debate" is driving everyone away which apparently means "they just weren't keen enough on the idea, otherwise they would have kept arguing until we all dropped dead." It might not technically be trolling but it sure is annoying, especially when you manage to keep dragging in new people who honestly don't realize their responses are only going to be used as fodder for your endless "debates."

failure how? as a business model? or as something that people (even a small select group) enjoy... the answers can be very different.

as a business model, yes it can fail if there aren't enough interested people or you don't attract the right people in worthwhile numbers, as a pastime... it is almost impossible to fail in all cases, because YOU are still having fun.

intelligently you start small if it's a business venture, and expand as finances allow.. to limit losses.

Well, that's exactly what I'd be going for - something that a small group enjoy - but at the same time that's the problem. Because I've hardly ever seen that work.

Typically what happens is that you have a small group of people who meet up, want to do something, get all jazzed and excited about it and maybe build or make avatars or otherwise invest.. and then never cross paths again, or if they do, it's just "sry g2g in 5". Unless you happen to get a group of people who have the same interests AND are in the same time-zone AND have roughly the same RL schedule AND have the same level of commitment to SL AND to the RP, this is pretty much inevitable, and the chances of that are tiny.

Or there's the "build first" approach, beloved of the owners of boxy clubs, where you build something to try and attract people, and it does attract them.. one at a time, so that each leaves with no-one else there to interact with, leaving the build empty for the next person.

So paradoxically, it seems the only way to actually get a small group groing is to build or organize something which interests a LARGE number of people, in the hooe that the subset of those who can be relied upon to actually meet up regularly will be enough for a small group!

There is actually a lot of truth to that. Honestly the most successful ones are where the owner does it all, and doesn't rely on others for anything. which is why many successful people end up burning out. (don't I know it)

But RP is kind of different, it pretty much requires the participants to participate, othewise it just doesn't work at all. There are other ways to get a small group going, like, starting a thread down there in the Gaming forum to ferret out others with like interests.

I still don't see on what basis Yumi is concluding the students were somehow being misused by the teacher or that they were not enjoying it. S/he seems to think that the teacher was arrogant for taking the position they took within the roleplay but by every indication the group was fine with it.

I don't see where there is even an issue here. I only see that Yumi doesn't understand how to replicate the success, and wants us to say how. Just like s/he wanted us to say how to be a successful creator. There isn't any answer except just go and do it, I'm afraid. If it were otherwise, everyone would be raking in the dough in SL (or RL for that matter) and/or all roleplay sims in SL would be thriving and filled with busy avatars every moment.

I'm still unsure what Yumi even saw other than a pretend classroom, and I don't know why this merits beating to death for answers. I honestly think Yumi sees this as some sort of social experiment i.e. "let's see how long nothing can be said yet I can get people to keep "debating" it."

Yumi are you familiar with the psychological term "projection" - you are "projecting" and assuming what the teachers/student felt, and you saw the teacher as an "ass" but no one else did. You proceed from your own very subjective take on it, and don't seem to see that very basic flaw in your 'argument.'

If the teacher never responded positively to the students and *only* gave abuse, then I can see there being an issue.

People will put up with things they would not normally temporarily just on the hope or promise of things being better down the road, but they will not do so forever.

That is why feedback is important... both in terms of the teacher giving the students feedback to let them know 'yes, there is better down the road' and from the students, to let the teacher know if he is pushing past that invisible line between enjoyment and frustration/boredom.

It sort of goes along with the whole mutual consent thing... most RP starts out with you sitting in for a bit and discuss what you are looking for and where the lines are on both sides, establishing ground rules and making sure that the new applicant is willing and able to play along. That does not mean the sim will neccessarily adjust for them, more a matter of seeing if they would fit in well with what is planned.

There also has to be a long range plan. People will not be happy training forever. At some point they will want more than that and the 'teacher' will need to have that thought out in advance.

Sure, but still it seems a little arrogant - why should it be THEM, after all, when it could have been any other member of the group? That the group was fine with it after the event doesn't tell us anything about how anyone felt before.



Well, LL put a lot of limitations on SL because it wasn't legal for it to be a gambling game..



Not at all - the point is, I didn't think she was an ass, but I would have thought of myself as an ass for doing that - but now it's done it's too late. Now, assuming that I came to that opinion via my experience in Second Life, someone else must have given me that point of view - after all, it's a user-created world.