Let's talk about TS.

[Bananerz]

I had one character on a game which was one of the more popular targets for TS and while many wanted the TS, only a select few got it. What was good is that the character was written to use these people for another purpose, cultivating relationships, obtaining information, putting ideas and manipulating, all sorts of fun. The players behind the screen understood that while it may be new or not so common for them in their day to day RP, that my character did this regularly. I really liked it when players would go out of their way to make what could have been dull TS into something more; those folks always gave me a boost of life rather than the “so we can TS now right?” behavior. Anyways, back to that character: I would give an @mail to the other player outlining a few boundaries, make sure I understand if they’re over 18, if they have particular triggers or comfort levels themselves and then when I get an @mail response back, we act like adults having fun.

I’ve tried a few times to take female characters but it felt many players were really rushing to the TS or marriage thing where I wanted to apply the brakes and say slow down. I usually gave up the character not very long after being pestered too many times, and I see a lot of points made by so many above that I'm nodding in agreement with. I don't think I was very successful at all although I'm not fun shaming folks who want that, and my flakiness on abandoning characters that I thought were so much more than TS or baby-making probably was a negative towards players that needed that character off roster (sorry).

My favorite character was a guy who asexual and found those lost in lust and love to be giving in to their passions rather than controlling it, and thus creating imbalance in the universe within them and the universe outside them.

I sort of miss playing him now.

[surreality]

@arkandel said in Let's talk about TS.:

@surreality said in Let's talk about TS.:

It never failed to stun me how many people would try anyway if told this, up to and including using dice to attempt to force the issue, regardless of the reason. It similarly never failed to stun me that they'd be stunned I would want nothing to do with them after that.

Yeah, there are assholes everywhere and also in the hobby. I think in that light it's a good thing we continue to beat the ol' dead horse of "state your limits and stick to them" since clearly someone, somewhere is still getting away with it or they wouldn't still be trying the 'ICA=ICC' gambit of throwing the dice then forcing others to TS-or-else-they-are-bad-players.

The sad fact is that we aren't wholly there yet. We still have arguments on the forum from time to time about how having limits of any kind is a sign of a bad player among otherwise reasonable people.

Almost universally, the very first post on this viewpoint will go right to the extreme caricature of someone who 'just isn't willing to ever let anything bad happen to their character ever and always has to win'.

Yes, the collective we know this sort of player described above exists in the hobby. They are far more rare than the person who says, "Hey, I don't want to write TS <about specific act or kink>." Conflating the two is not appropriate as they are not the same thing at all*, but it tends to happen from step #1/post #1/etc.

This has a real chilling effect on issue reporting; if you think you're going to get a staffer who slings that argument in your face and labels you the bad player, yes, you should probably leave that game, but you leave that game knowing other people are going to be left to deal with the same thing. Plenty of players have found themselves faced with that attitude -- which demonizes them for things they aren't guilty of -- when they are seeking assistance in an uncomfortable position.

Think about this realistically for a moment and you'll likely begin to see the real scope of the problem: "I am feeling gross and pressured, I went to staff to ask for help, and instead of helping, they called me a bad player and enabled the creeper who has no respect for my player-side limits."

How likely are you to approach staff again, even on another game, after this happens? In many cases: much less, if at all. This is a fairly common scenario to encounter as a player, and we talk a lot here about being willing to approach staff with these things, and people needing to speak up to staff after an attempt to handle it themselves in a mature and responsible way doesn't work. We also talk about how many people just 'put up and shut up' and put up with bad behaviors far longer than they should and don't report an issue until it is a morass of indecipherable chaos that has gone on for weeks or months, and I think this is a glowing neon sign as to one of the reasons why.

We (the collective) need to work on that.

• It arguably can be if the player trots out this same argument on everything they encounter they don't like, but barring evidence of that, the accusation is extreme, inaccurate, and completely inappropriate.

[Tinuviel]

@arkandel said in Let's talk about TS.:

there are assholes everywhere

That's my TS style.

[Arkandel]

@surreality said in Let's talk about TS.:

Think about this realistically for a moment and you'll likely begin to see the real scope of the problem: "I am feeling gross and pressured, I went to staff to ask for help, and instead of helping, they called me a bad player and enabled the creeper who has no respect for my player-side limits."

Oh that's true. But as you already pointed out, if you can't trust staff on a game you are screwed either way.

What I'd like to try and do is, assuming we're neither dealing with assholes or bad staff, to try and figure out how to systematize these things. I'll even risk @Thenomain's snicker and ask, naively, whether this is a social problem we can solve through code.

Maybe we could apply a Tinder approach to this? The left/right swipe thing.

So I meet Jane IC. I don't know if her player wants to TS.

I type something like "+interest/ts Jane". There's no notification unless Jane has done the same from the other side (+interest/ts Arkandel). If so we both get a message we want to e-shag!

And so from that point on all the other boxes (heh, sorry) can be checked the same way (preferences, inclinations, kinks, whatever) without people having to broadcast their TS related whitelist since that might attract the wrong kind of attention.

Squicks can and should still be public and not subject to this system.

Thoughts?

[Bananerz]

I do like the ability to set a flag for TS and particular ratings. I think the +interest/ts code is an interesting idea, as long as I could review that list any time and delete folks off it. If folks are on my ts list, sure they can look at preferences, things like that.

You have to treat folks as responsible adults up to the point they show they aren't. Folks who abuse it, become creepers, make things difficult for others should be pruned off the RP garden.

[WildBaboons]

And it's easy to make a trigger that automatically does a +interest/ts <whoever just walked in the room> just like one of those swipe left meat robots for Tinder

[Arkandel]

@wildbaboons It wouldn't do anything if the other person doesn't reciprocate though.

And if they do, you CAUGHT THEM! They like you! Mwah-hah-hah?

[Tinuviel]

Do we really need a coded 'system' for this?
We're adults, we can have conversations.

[surreality]

I don't see this one as a code problem. I really don't. If someone wants to try that, more power to them -- but it's not something I'd personally implement.

[Doozer]

Wait so y'all are coming up with Tinder TS?

[Hella]

I could see this going badly. 'I swiped right and nothing popped up. They don't like me! OMG I HATE THEM!' and cue OOC drama.

[surreality]

@vulgarkitten Or 'omfg I don't TS and everyone in this room wants to fuck me shit shit shit RUN FOR THE HILLS'.

[Ganymede]

@surreality said in Let's talk about TS.:

Or 'omfg I don't TS and everyone in this room wants to fuck me shit shit shit RUN FOR THE HILLS'.

[Arkandel]

@surreality said in Let's talk about TS.:

@vulgarkitten Or 'omfg I don't TS and everyone in this room wants to fuck me shit shit shit RUN FOR THE HILLS'.

You wouldn't see their interest unless you expressed yours, too.

[Kestrel]

@arkandel said in Let's talk about TS.:

Maybe we could apply a Tinder approach to this? The left/right swipe thing.

So I meet Jane IC. I don't know if her player wants to TS.

I type something like "+interest/ts Jane". There's no notification unless Jane has done the same from the other side (+interest/ts Arkandel). If so we both get a message we want to e-shag!

I hate this idea, much like I hate Tinder.

Put it this way: in real life, I don't walk around with a flashing neon sign on my forehead that says 'up for a shag'. It's not that I'm never up for it, it's that I'm never so desperate for it that I need to advertise the fact that I might be.

If I did that, I would expect that all kinds of random weirdos would approach me and say, 'Well OK, do you like the look of me? You're up for it, I'm up for it, why don't we go back to my place?'

That's not how chemistry works.

I'd be much more likely to end up with someone if we just happened to share common interests and enjoyed spending time with each other without any ulterior motives. At that point I might say, 'You know, you're fun to hang around with. Wanna be more than friends?' And if the answer is no, theoretically we would still be friends, because we mesh well regardless.

That's how TS should work. I like your writing, you like my writing, we are not approaching each other specifically with the goal of TS in mind, we just happen to enjoy RPing with each other and chemistry naturally arises between our characters.

Some of my characters end up in relationships, some of them don't. I never set out with the specific goal of getting a character laid. I approach people who seem fun, and if the right chemistry happens, it just does. At that point, and not before, we might start talking about where this is going.

Maybe something like what you're describing would work on an advertised sex-game, like Shang. But on a game that's about more than that, I think that TS should occur as a natural byproduct of organic character interactions, not as a main goal.

Maybe I'm alone in that. But I doubt I'd feel comfortable playing on a game that had that kind of code, and if I did play it, I'd have my preferences set as a default to 'no'. I'd be insulted if anyone approached any one of my characters with the specific goal to e-bang. I put effort into their backstories. They're more than a piece of meat, yanno?

[Arkandel]

@kestrel said in Let's talk about TS.:

Maybe I'm alone in that.

It doesn't seem to be the case! I guess it wasn't as good an idea as I thought it'd be. Ohwell.

[Tinuviel]

If the idea contains the words "Like Tinder" "just like in Kerbal Space Program" or "on an episode of Voyager" they are bad ideas.

[Doozer]

+flag/on DTF

[Haven]

[Ganymede]

@kestrel said in Let's talk about TS.:

Put it this way: in real life, I don't walk around with a flashing neon sign on my forehead that says 'up for a shag'. It's not that I'm never up for it, it's that I'm never so desperate for it that I need to advertise the fact that I might be.

The problem isn't that people don't know I'm up for a shag. I'm always up for a shag.

What people don't understand is that I'm not up for a shag with them.