Important thing about theory of mind stuff: others don't have to think like you, so listen to what they have to say about their state. Be aware that where they arrive will not be where you do given a specific set of inputs.
In short, just because it baffles you doesn't mean don't pay attention. Rather it means that everyone needs to get the idea that no one can easily predict how everyone will react to anything.
I have a waggish sense of humor.
@Misadventure said:
Important thing about theory of mind stuff: others don't have to think like you, so listen to what they have to say about their state. Be aware that where they arrive will not be where you do given a specific set of inputs.
In short, just because it baffles you doesn't mean don't pay attention. Rather it means that everyone needs to get the idea that no one can easily predict how everyone will react to anything.
Oh, I always take other things into consideration like that. I can totally be ok with people not arriving at the same place. The only thing that I don't really excuse is incivility. It doesn't really matter if we end up in different places, civility is pretty much a must-have, and talking like reasonable, rational adults is something that I expect of everyone, regardless of the situation. (And yes, I am perfectly ok with disagreements, even somewhat impassioned ones, but devolving into rudeness or ad hominem attacks, etc, are a bit beyond the pale as far as my tolerance tends to go.)
@silentsophia said:
Honestly, I'm fine with NSFW stuff on a wiki as long as it is marked so I can click into it or catch up on things without having nudes dropped in abruptly. If you post TS logs, some sort of warning would be appreciated so I don't think hey, this is that plot investig-- oh he's investigating something alright.
But I'm not too fussed. I do feel a bit weird when pictures are put up wholesale with water marks (hi suicide girls pictures), but life is too short to worry about it I suspect.
Oh, there's another good topic. Instead of people just expecting logs to be marked hey sexytmes fun ahoy' why don'we just add something to whatever log template we're using where we can put a rating on it? Possibly also with a summary? Just have it post to little parenthesis after the log title for the short rating, with a box inside the log that gives the rating and information on how it got that way in the first place. Use the Motion Picture Association of America rating system, G to NC-17, possibly even adding X and XXX if it's nothing but sexytimes.
That way, marking something NSFW because of 'TS' doesn't put such a stigma on it, when something could also be NSFW because of violence or even language. Most people assume NSFW means that someone is gettin' their kink on, when that's not necessarily the case, and isn't even treated the same as other things that could get that label.
Rated PG13 - Distractingly gay acor in a straight role, goat love and a 70's soundtrack even though it's not the 70's.
why don'we just add something to whatever log template we're using where we can put a rating on it?
Because rating systems are stupid and don't work for shit? See the difference between PG-13 and R today, and between either and the same rating on movies a decade ago.
If people want to make assumptions about what NSFW means beyond 'The person who tagged this figured you probably wouldn't want to get caught reading it at work.', fuck 'em.
I am on the fence on it, but I think it's okay if staff wants to hide things behind tags that they also believe are NSFW. It's enough of a trust issue that keeps me on the fence, but we are not afraid to call out nonsense staff decisions.
On the other side of that fence, if swears and boobies are not okay for your wrk, you probably should be aware of the kinds of places you are going.
@HelloRaptor said:
why don'we just add something to whatever log template we're using where we can put a rating on it?
Because rating systems are stupid and don't work for shit? See the difference between PG-13 and R today, and between either and the same rating on movies a decade ago.
If people want to make assumptions about what NSFW means beyond 'The person who tagged this figured you probably wouldn't want to get caught reading it at work.', fuck 'em.
This. The MPAA is a terrible organization and nothing should be modeled on it ever.
A note about graphic sex or violent torture in the 'summary' line of a log is nice, but I generally don't care (also my workplace, the bank that blocks almost everything but randomly not most wikis, doesn't care about most things that aren't pictures or videos).
I'd be fine with what @Three-Eyed-Crow said. Let me know if there's graphic sex or extreme violence, tag it NSFW and let it be. The rating systems are kinda weird in regards to sex vs violence.
It would be a thing to make a plug-in to MediaWiki to scan for an 'NSFW' category and add it to any links to that page.
Y'all enjoy.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@Thenomain
It's called DPL. 
If DPL can turn all links, to images or pages or otherwise into the name of the link with (NSFW) after it, I will be very impressed.
“If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
@Thenomain said:
If DPL can turn all links, to images or pages or otherwise into the name of the link with
(NSFW)after it, I will be very impressed.
You should do this!
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
I would actually really like it if we could tag NSFW pages with a Category:NSFW and it would make anyone going to one of those have to go through a filter page that says, 'are you sure you want to see something NSFW?'
That would be ballz. Especially if you could opt out.
"Excuse the hell out of you. He's a bag of dicks. I'm a carefully curated box of cocks." -- to @GirlCalledBlu upon being misrepresented.
@Coin said:
I would actually really like it if we could tag NSFW pages with a Category:NSFW and it would make anyone going to one of those have to go through a filter page that says, 'are you sure you want to see something NSFW?'
That would be ballz. Especially if you could opt out.
I could definitely see that being useful for other games! On Eldritch, I'm not sure it's that much of an issue. You already have some pretty conservative wiki policies on appropriate imagery (I've read them, and I sadded, because there was a picture that I wanted to post where like, the top half of a butt is visible, but it went against the guidelines, so I didn't....). I think that adding it for text might be a bit extraneous unless the opt-out you're referring to is setting the filter to 'off', in which case that's cooler. Otherwise it seems sort of burdensome if you're just going to straight text, which is generally more acceptable than imagery, don't you think?
Though I could see how this would have its uses, too, especially for remarkably strict employers, but that also depends heavily on them being categorized properly.
Edit to Add: To Clarify, this is assuming that it does what Theno says and marks every instance of the link with the NSFW if it's properly categorized, so like, even on player pages it would clearly read NSFW. Every clickable instance would have that. That's the reason why I say it might not be necessary just for pure text.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
@Derp said:
On Eldritch, I'm not sure it's that much of an issue. You already have some pretty conservative wiki policies on appropriate imagery (I've read them, and I sadded, because there was a picture that I wanted to post where like, the top half of a butt is visible, but it went against the guidelines, so I didn't....).
I've seen oh-so many tops of butts at places like Walmart. So many more than I ever wanted to. Man-cracks everywhere. 
TIL: Eldritch is more chaste than Walmart.
Nothing wrong with that.
I'm happy to waste some time on http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/ now and then, but I would NEVER read it at work.
@Three-Eyed-Crow said:
Nothing wrong with that.
I'm happy to waste some time on People of Wal-Mart now and then, but I would NEVER read it at work.
Oh, I didn't mean that it was a bad thing. Simply that there are already some existing safeguards. Me being sad does not equate with thing being bad. I should have clarified that.
Slightly off topic. I have no problem with TS, in some sort of context, I don't even care if there wasn't any lead-up RP besides one pose saying "joe and jane met in the bar and went back to jane's place", but I get really bothered by people who send random semi-sexual (or blatantly) pages or ooc poses/etc when in the ooc room or alone in some room for whatever reason. And there seem to be quite a few of them.
@Tempest said:
Slightly off topic. I have no problem with TS, in some sort of context, I don't even care if there wasn't any lead-up RP besides one pose saying "joe and jane met in the bar and went back to jane's place", but I get really bothered by people who send random semi-sexual (or blatantly) pages or ooc poses/etc when in the ooc room or alone in some room for whatever reason. And there seem to be quite a few of them.
Yeah, on non-sex based games that's creepy. There's flirting, and there's ... that.
@Arkandel said:
@Tempest said:
Slightly off topic. I have no problem with TS, in some sort of context, I don't even care if there wasn't any lead-up RP besides one pose saying "joe and jane met in the bar and went back to jane's place", but I get really bothered by people who send random semi-sexual (or blatantly) pages or ooc poses/etc when in the ooc room or alone in some room for whatever reason. And there seem to be quite a few of them.
Yeah, on non-sex based games that's creepy. There's flirting, and there's ... that.
I generally only engage in TS if it is somehow appropriate for the character and the context. There are times when sex is a valid part of a story, or can be entertaining. But I have (thankfully) never witnessed someone doing this in the OOC rooms. That -would- just be creepy.
@Coin said:
I would actually really like it if we could tag NSFW pages with a Category:NSFW and it would make anyone going to one of those have to go through a filter page that says, 'are you sure you want to see something NSFW?'
That would be ballz. Especially if you could opt out.
I wish games were more strict about character wiki pictures. It's like some people have no common sense when it comes to their "pb pictures" or I guess just can't play a sexpot without nearly erotic pics to support them. Sure, maybe they don't post outright nudes, but goddamn some people come close.
Important thing about theory of mind stuff: others don't have to think like you, so listen to what they have to say about their state. Be aware that where they arrive will not be where you do given a specific set of inputs.
In short, just because it baffles you doesn't mean don't pay attention. Rather it means that everyone needs to get the idea that no one can easily predict how everyone will react to anything.
