| >> I remember the take away was that GM support (... or the potential for RPAs) are generally something that Mentors and Official Orders can give out|
This is absolutely not the case, and I feel very confident in saying that it will never be the case.
I don't want to derail the main thread, or beat dead horses by going back into significant discussion of the previous thread you're mentioning, but to remove any possible confusion, what is restricted at this time to Mentors/Official Orders vis a vis player-run events is the food/drink carts, gift crates, and in-game announcements. If anyone has questions about GM involvement with player-run events that wasn't clarified for them by the previous thread, they are absolutely welcome to email me at email@example.com and I'll be more than happy to discuss any questions or concerns they have!
>>I also refuse to step foot into Crossing these days due to how invasions and events are handled. All I see are mechanics abuse ( Triads ), and GMs who award participation RPAs despite the fact I simply died once while afk traveling in and got resurrected almost immediately, was insulted OOCly for bringing up what I saw as mechanics abuse, and then told by GMs to keep my mouth relatively shut - I even tried to return the RPA that I was awarded.
While I can't speak to the specific incident you're referencing here, as with any other staff interactions, if you've had any experience in an event or series of events that concerns you as potentially inappropriate, please email the Feedback Department at firstname.lastname@example.org . We take that sort of thing seriously. edit: This goes for any other concerns anyone has regarding staff interactions or staff rulings. Feedback is the appropriate way to address this, as they're the ones empowered to look into and handle exactly these sorts of issues. That exists entirely to help provide a measure of distance for the process and oversight for in-game staff.
That said, invasions are incredibly hectic on the GM end, and while not all invasions will always result in RPAs being awarded (that depends on the response of the PCs, after all!), when we are trying to catch all of the active participants in an invasion to award RPAs, sometimes we do sweep up some names of PCs that were minimally involved. While it's not intentional, it's not something that I'm personally inclined to worry too too much about. I would much rather that all of the GMs eventing and invading accidentally reward a few less than totally involved PCs due to the chaos than leave out entire huge chunks of participants because they are trying to be absolutely certain to not reward anyone but the very heaviest participants. This is not a false dichotomy. It really is that busy on the GM end when invading, and we really do try our best to capture everyone who was involved so that they can be rewarded as appropriate. Sometimes we do still miss someone who was active no matter how hard we try, but more often when we err, we reward someone who was only marginally involved. I'm okay with that, because it will never be 100% perfect. We are human after all!