To My Fellow Players and Friends at ITRP:

I just thought it appropriate - and perhaps somewhat necessary - to shed some light on circumstances that led to me

dropping my moderator status on the subreddit[s] - as two others have before me in the span of...a month? Especially

now, after being met with repeated instances of unnecessary hostility following my leave [like this, for one:

http://pastebin.com/U2tiw3zs] I don't really think that there can be any question or doubt as to my love for the

subreddit/game or my dedication to seeing it become as successful as it is today, given the amount of work that I

have put into it during my tenure as a moderator, which is why it pains me write this now. I can only speak for myself,

though I know that the other moderators who have recently left have similar feelings on these matters.

When we start out - both as players and as moderators - it's with plenty of enthusiasm and optimism, which was why

it was easy for me to believe that the multiple allegations of rolls being rigged by the head moderator [/u/Ankerholm]

in ITRP 1.0 were entirely baseless and easy to dismiss. For those of you who were around during that time, you may

remember that we had an exodus over the course of that game - in which two other subreddits were formed by disgruntled

players. Others simply left before the end of that version, when requesting transparency for rolls made was refused

and refuted time and again.

I raised the question then: if we are doing nothing wrong as moderators, and our rolls are fair, then why shouldn't

we simply appease our community of players and answer the retractors by creating a roll channel, and rolling there

for all who want to see? The answer was a negative one - logs were kept of the rolls, after all - in a google doc,

I believe? - so if a player wanted to see them or dispute them, all they had to do was ask. A doc, as we all know,

can be edited. Rolls done without witnesses and/or with no parameters posted prior to the roll can be just as easily

influenced by any personal bias a moderator may have.

Transparency would keep us all honest, I thought, and would definitely quell the rumours that the head moderator - who

was the sole mod doing rolls through the Common Man account at that time - wasn't fixing them to his liking. That his

character, Bran Stark, always had successful outcomes/rolls and spy/sabotage attempts always failed against him was a

huge source of contention among a vast majority of our players at the time.

In 2.0, we faced a similar problem in the wake of Roland Westerling, who, without lances or riding skills, managed to

pull off a near-impossible feat when he came out on top of the joust as the grand champion - the rolls were done once

again, after all, by the head moderator. The questions of fixed rolls were answered and somewhat satisfied by the fact

that another moderator did the rolls for Roland. Thing is, the rolls were always done by a simple request of "Hey, roll

a 7d50 for me," or something to that effect, without the rest of us moderators ever knowing what the parameters were or

what sort of mechanics were being used, though we asked about it. Even argued that he probably shouldn't be doing

those rolls, and offered to help out - we were refused:

https://gyazo.com/de300e92383bbbeedfbf071d7f4f6d83

https://gyazo.com/a1baf8c58b9432eb124bdf3b230afc92

We never explained or revealed that part to you. And here is where I'll admit that I was complicit in some of these

things because I didn't speak up sooner. I just kept hoping it would get better - that things would change. Besides, I

didn't want to believe that it was true. Who wants to think that about a person? After all, I'd been standing in defense

of the rolls, the sub, and the mods as a *team* for months. So please, don't assume that I'm trying to decry that I'm

innocent in any way here, because I'm not.

But I didn't want it all to be a lie. I loved the sub, after all, and was having fun writing - and that's what counts

in the end, right?

Things in 2.0 only got worse, however, starting when the first Alesander Baratheon left. Kind of have to wonder if it

was because he was being pressured to conform his rp/writing/what he wanted to accomplish with his character with the

vision the head moderator had about how the game - his game - would play out. Jeyne Westerling did, after all, fall in

love with him, and he with her. That it didn't *make sense* in the grand scheme of things attributed these things to

being META entirely, rather than simply a decision on behalf of the writers/players. Alesander 2.0 - otherwise known as

Everan Lannister, Lord of Lannisport and the ...Lion's Hold? I forget how it goes - was granted the ability to accept

the character as an alt after lengthy discussion with the head moderator and his second-in-command once the player

agreed to adhere to certain storylines and no longer entertain others.

That he had the audacity to write the character as he saw fit to, and not as the mods had instructed, was to his

detriment and led to the character's demise. He was accused of plenty of META as well, with regard to not only seeking

out/making plans with Jeyne Westerling despite his betrothal to Lyarra Stark, but also due to the fact that he wanted a

Trial by Seven for Leyton Hightower in lieu of a Trial by Combat - but that's not what the head moderator wanted.

He had to die, per the head moderator - http://i.imgur.com/foxqIl4.png?1 - and no one was discouraging him, to be

honest. Not even me - but hey, who doesn't want to be the queen? It was personal bias that killed Alesander Baratheon

the second on October 23rd, 2015, rather than the poison - the sweetsleep - that Roland Westerling slipped into his cup

with a vague mention of putting a hand in his pocket before offering the king a glass of wine. This happened in modchat

while we were waiting to see whether he'd take the bait and actually drink from his cup:

https://gyazo.com/0ac7ea1c933b698a7bf85485a2937704 .

Oh, right. Did I mention that I have always used mIRC and have logged everything in every channel?

We got A LOT of flack when the king was killed. Upset a lot of our players - some were more vocal than others, which,

I've learned over the past year and half, only ends up getting you banned. Once again, I was complicit in defending

the actions of the head moderator, which I've done numerous times over the past year and then some, but no more. I was

defending the sub, ultimately, and the rest of the mod team. After all, if he was corrupt, weren't we all?

Everan seemed to get past it though, and started playing his Kingsguard, Arthur Dayne - who began looking into the

assasination of the king. Others joined in, but were thwarted in their attempts - whether they were told they couldn't

possibly make X assumption or come to X conclusion - because there was no way that Roland Westerling could ever lose.

Time bubbles were awful in King's Landing in 2.0, to the detriment of other mods as well - Leyton Hightower never got a

really fair shot when it came to escape, told that he couldn't post X because X had already happened.

That time bubble caused a massive stall in the game - 2.0 never really recovered from it, especially in the wake of the

mass exodus we experienced yet again by disgruntled players voicing their dissent when it came to rolls and 'transparency'.

Fire and Blood RP was formed in the wake of it all, and a lot of players there were/are really salty. I don't blame any

of them at all - they were entitled to be upset, and many were banned before they'd actually committed any bannable

offenses. That some of them returned pretending to be new more than once, some in an effort to assist Cassana Baratheon

in her take-down of Roland Westerling - who became regent ultimately, sense a pattern here? - was perhaps not the best

decision ever made, however. Still, a lot of the 'reasons' in our ban list are either false/unwarranted, or blown *way*

out of proportion.

But that's not why I say they were justified.

See, I was there in modchat when the roll for Alesander's death happened. Generally, when rolling potential deaths/sabotages

etc., the player who could potentially lose their character is made aware - or so I was told when Belen Aia tried

to poison Lucion Lannister's flask with a sabotage attempt back in 1.0. Everan/Alesander - to my knowledge - was never

given any such warning/notification, but was told after the fact by gleeful mods who hoped he'd just rage-quit.

Now, generally these mechanics would have consisted of a success/fail roll, and then a roll to determine the extent of

the injuries at the very least.

Unfortunately, Alesander was dead the minute he drank from that glass. It was pre-determined. Granted, a roll was done -

a single roll - without any parameters. Followed by a simple statement of "He's dead," by the second-in-command,

/u/English_American. A *real* roll was done /s/, however, for the extent of Roland Westerling's injuries, because he too,

drank the wine. It was never a even a remote possibility/consideration that he was in danger of dying.

But no, you won't find this roll in our roll archives. You would have to ask for it. But here's a tip: don't let anyone

show you the roll's results simply pasted into a google doc or a pastebin. Why? Because they're easily edited, and if you

ask for them, they are definitely going to want to try and edit them so that they can conceal the truth about how that roll

actually went down. Ask the head moderator or his second-in-command for a screenshot of their logs from October 23rd. If

they have both *conveniently* misplaced them, then ask me for mine.

But why now? Why am I finally stepping forward to say something now? Well, I hate to disappoint people, but I don't have

a new ASOIAF sub in the works, so ruining/bringing down ITRP is *DEFINITELY NOT* my motivation. It's just time to make

things right. Things there definitely need to change.

Why? Because it's all happening again. And that's the real reason why I chose to step down as a moderator at long last.

Personal bias leads to poor decision-making, unfair treatment/decisions made, and rigged rolls - at least when you get on

the wrong side of the head moderator by having an opinion or a character/playing style that he dislikes/opposes him/his

characters or his agenda/plan for the storyline. Heaven forbid you want to try and write a strong female character in

this setting.

Basically, Jaehaera (and Matarys to some extent) Targaryen is/are to 3.0 what Everan Lannister/Alesander Baratheon the

second was to 2.0.

The words 'hate' and 'spite' have been used numerous times in modchat. You don't have to take my word for it, though.

Unlike people who have tried to point fingers in the past, make accusations, and call our head mod a nazi, I have plenty

of logs.

Viserys, the mad king at the center of the reset's starting scenario was always supposed to die at the feast/during the

feast, or at least very *early* on in 3.0 to provide the necessary tension for the story to incite some conflict between

potential claimants. The head moderator, however, began toying with the idea of keeping him alive just to spite Jaehaera

/u/TheWorldIsWideEnough - one of the potential claimants:

https://gyazo.com/faa26a0ac3d58e5d621de577f9b0796e.

I didn't think he was serious at the time. And to be honest, the player initally came across very strongly and has never

had any qualms voicing her opinions - I wasn't her biggest fan in the beginning admittedly, primarily because of comments

made regarding our scenario. Silly, I know, but it was more an issue of pride than anything, really - we'd all been working

really hard on getting 3.0 ready, and questions of why didn't we do this or that/this doesn't make sense definitely weren't

what any of us wanted to hear at that time - but she's a phenomenal writer, and was really into her character and her push

for throne.

It wasn't just a joke though, the comment about keeping Viserys alive. This happened: http://pastebin.com/y1Zbw2a5 - and

that's a paste I made of the modchat while I was on kiwi at work, sent frantically to other mods to get them online so

we could try to talk it all out. Which we did. Many of us disagreed, as evidenced there, but we ultimately decided -

after assurances from the head moderator that this was *not* in any way to spite Jaehaera, but was to 'tie up some loose

ends' - that Viserys could remain alive for a time, so long as he died before ever making it out of the Reach.

Only after the question of whether or not Jaehaera was traveling with the Inquisition - who were captured/mostly killed,

etc., as you all know - came up did it come to light that bias was still very, very prevalent, in the decision-making

process. But you can make your own decisions/opinions. Here are some screenshots of the modmail/disccussion pertaining to

that particular question/decision:

http://i.imgur.com/H72Xzir.png?1

http://i.imgur.com/prCoiQ2.png?1

http://i.imgur.com/mjhCGhr.png?1

http://i.imgur.com/mjhCGhr.png?1

A fairly heated discussion followed those modmails - or continued as they were happening - in the modchat about whether it

was or wasn't META, etc., what was fair, what wasn't fair, and why weren't we fair in 2.0, and so on and so forth. Ultimately,

this is pretty much how it ended, and I think my statements there still ring true today, summing up why I feel as I do now,

and why I felt the need to come forth:

http://i.imgur.com/gQGPsRo.png

I haven't actually seen Jaehaera around much these days, and I hope it's not because of all that, but I wouldn't blame her

if it was. Who wants someone else telling them where their character is/what their intentions were?

My point here is that ultimately, we are not any better than anyone else, and what they accused us of did actually happen.

But I can't in good conscience allow it to happen again. Or to continue to happen to others.

And you, the community, shouldn't sit idly by and let it happen to your fellow members/players. Because it could be you on

the wrong side of it all next, and trust me, it's not a fun place to be.

At the very least, after this, you should be demanding that ALL ROLLS are done either by a roll bot on reddit in the thread

they're for - with parameters set up beforehand, or that they're done in #itrprolls, but WITH PARAMETERS set up beforehand

and a clear description of who/what they're for.

It's sad to say, but the illegitimacy of a few rolls brings into question the legitimacy of everything else, too. Which of your

spies/sabs/event, etc. rolls were true failures, and which of them failed because the moderators didn't want your character

to succeed?

Anyway, we all know that this is bound to be my farewell letter. But that's just how things go.

So long and thanks for all the fish.

Love you guys.