The Case Against Real PBs

Ghost

@Ganymede Apology accepted. I also came in super hot and my tone was snide.

Ghost

@Macha I honestly think Ai should be the future for stuff like ttrpg/mu character images. Spitting this positively?

No one can recreate it for another char
Even at its most realistic it's still art instead of an actual person's likeness, which avoids other issues
If you're good with Ai art engines, the picture itself tells a story of the creativity of the creator, which in a way is advertising rp with you
It completely eliminates the "...I refuse to roleplay with Charlie Sheen PBs because of this one experience in 2003" drama, and also protects unwitting players who choose that PB from being related in any way to the 2003 weirdo
It blends user creativity and allows for visual thinkers to see what is being presented as a char.

All positive points IMO

faraday

@Ghost said in The Case Against Real PBs:

Even at its most realistic it's still art instead of an actual person's likeness, which avoids other issues

That's not strictly true given the current slate of AI tools. Most of them are ripping off existing stock photos, copyrighted images, or even just regular social media posts from actual people. You just can't tell where it came from or how like someone else it is. Check out some of the examples in the copyright cases.

Maybe someday when the tools are more ethically sourced I'd be on board with it, but not now.

It completely eliminates the "...I refuse to roleplay with Charlie Sheen PBs because of this one experience in 2003" drama, and also protects unwitting players who choose that PB from being related in any way to the 2003 weirdo

I get where you're coming from, but I don't see this as a problem that needs solving. If somebody's going to refuse to roleplay with me because they don't like my PB, good riddance.

reimesu

AI isn't actually an ethical solution, as it ends up ripping off real artists without compensation. It's useful and expedient but it isn't necessarily ethical.

Frankly, the entire argument against PBs isn't an argument against PBs, it's an argument against unethical players who are being manipulative. Which really means that you have to be vigilant about who you play with and what you're willing to get into with people you don't know.

Derp

@reimesu said in The Case Against Real PBs:

Frankly, the entire argument against <insert whatever blank you want here> isn't an argument against <insert whatever blank you want here>, it's an argument against unethical players who are being manipulative. Which really means that you have to be vigilant about who you play with and what you're willing to get into with people you don't know.

I feel like the entire history of this forum can be summed up thus.

reimesu

@Derp Well...yes. It actually is, when you realize the original WORA was there to inform people about which games were run by psycho-hose-beasts.

faraday

@reimesu said in The Case Against Real PBs:

Frankly, the entire argument against PBs isn't an argument against PBs, it's an argument against unethical players who are being manipulative.

To be fair, that wasn't the entire argument, though it was the one that got the most attention. Others have raised valid points for and against that have nothing to do with players being manipulative.

Ghost

@faraday said in The Case Against Real PBs:

If somebody's going to refuse to roleplay with me because they don't like my PB, good riddance.

Hah. I should have followed this advice a couple of times. After a while I began to recognize people page-investigating me to see if I was "so and so using that PB on a game a few years ago" as a red flag.

It can be hard, though. The energy of someone wanting to RP with you was attracting and sometimes I bypassed a few red flags in favor of not being bored, but the end result in those cases was always pretty bad

Ghost

@reimesu said in The Case Against Real PBs:

Frankly, the entire argument against PBs isn't an argument against PBs, it's an argument against unethical players who are being manipulative. Which really means that you have to be vigilant about who you play with and what you're willing to get into with people you don't know.

While I don't disagree with you on this point in any way, I just wanted to say that my argument against PBs is a bit of column A and B. I still never truly liked PBs. My argument was also against using PBs.

I remember one time I used a famous rock musician as a PB. A few years later I was at one of their concerts, looking out at the actual dude I used as a likeness for rp, including some TS, and I felt so weird about it that I never wanted to go back. I technically have a distant RL connection to Emma Stone by like 5 degrees (her friend's sister married a former coworker and I guess occasionally comes by for barbecues, etc lol) and I gather that even mentioning that she's been used as a PB in conversation (should a chance run-in occur) would be super uncomfortable.

I have a long history of being around celebrities (some are friends, some are friends of friends) and I've always been the type to try to see and treat them like regular-ass people, and knowing the amount of harassment and unrequested sexualization of the female celebrities I've known (to the point of them having to worry about people waiting for them in lobbies, etc) the idea of it all just grew sour for me over the years. Many of them are well aware that if they google themselves they're gonna see things that make them feel unsafe or uncomfortable, and I imagine PBs might do that.

PBs just made me feel like a weird, creepy dork. (Edit) So I guess you could say that my angle is that out of consideration to treat those people like regular people, it became somewhat of a conscientious stance for me. This explains why (at least for me, paired with the desire to see good writing) I feel so strongly about it.

Edit: Also, jeez @reimesu the shout-out to PHBs took me back a decade or more.

Macha

I mean, waaaay waaay back in the day, I saw a woman at the Ren Faire I worked at who was the physical embodiment of the medieval character I was playing - a badass swordswoman. I told one of the guys who worked in my area with me about it, and one day when we were heading out for the day, he steered me over to her.

HE had told her about my 'online collaborative story writing hobby', and about my character.. She was not only flattered, she offered to pose for photos for me, so I could USE HER as my PB. I was flustered and embarrassed, but I totally took pictures of her. I might still have one around here somewhere. So.. maybe not all people would be bothered, if they knew?

Misadventure

@Macha certainly.

You discussed having her actual image used in association with the character and their fiction. (even if you never did use it)

Ghost

@Macha Good, because consent is sexay

LittleLizard

I really cannot believe that this person keeps getting passes. If we want to concern ourselves with actions that are unhealthy for the community and/or individuals who are no longer part of it who feel compelled to return every so often to remind us all how we are -insert opinions here- for still taking part in said hobby.. like are warnings per thread? If a week passes do warnings reset? Are we talking warnings per admin, or does two warnings from one admin then more from another admin not count as consecutive? Is it okay because of who it is? Is it okay because they post the most? What even are the ethics here? Especially in mildly constructive.

Im not a therapist but I will say what mine tells me when -someone elses voice- tries to alienate or shame me for being different, experiencing or processing in my own way. Whomever needs to hear it after this absolute shitpost: You're not gross. You're not creepy. Fantasy is absolutely natural whether s-ual or not. Likenesses being used happens in all genres and thats okay (barring profit). Its okay to have human experiences and feelings. Give yourself some grace.

Dont let people who keep coming back to express how much better they are because they "don't like/participate/respect the same things you do" anymore get under the skin. And question why people who you believe are usually sensible people give it a pass.

Ghost

@LittleLizard Who is this about?

Regardless, the opinions of former players, including those still connected to the hobby by numerous friends who still partake, isn't without value. Not liking specific things and defending oneself when personal attacks are made isn't intentionally cruel.

I'm not for everyone! If you dislike what I <whoever this was about that isn't me otherwise you would have said so> says, I <that person> always responds well to respectful retort, and if you can't muster that I recommend you mute/ignore/block whichever person this could ever be about that surely isn't me.

Given the fact that this forum has had people banned for doxxing, stalking, and real-life threats but had a whole section that was super cool with directly gathering to laugh and make fun of specific people, analyze their real life mental faculties, and was generally okay with stalking so long as it was someone they felt was collectively unpopular....I think you can handle a negative opinion on PBs.

Derp

@LittleLizard said in The Case Against Real PBs:

And question why people who you believe are usually sensible people give it a pass.

Nobody gave it a pass. It was called out and acted upon. By two different admins.

Giving it a pass would be just ignoring it. That's not what happened.

Also, we took an action that we thought was appropriate once we conferenced a bit and talked about scope and impact, other things. If you don't agree with us? Cool. But it was our call, and that's the call we made.

To answer your much broader question above -- we'll always make decisions based on the totality of the circumstances, including the severity of the behavior and time between infractions.

Cool? Cool.

faraday

@Derp said in The Case Against Real PBs:

Nobody gave it a pass. It was called out and acted upon. By two different admins.

It is your right to moderate the forum as you see fit. It is our right to point out when we feel it's not being effective.

Calling something out is not actually solving the problem. It's like if there's a kid on the playground who goes around hitting other kids, and the only thing the teacher does is say "Hey stop hitting". It doesn't actually change the behavior, and other kids will see that there are no real consequences for hitting.

That's what's happened on the MU forums, where for years the only tangible consequence for being un-constructive was getting the thread pushed to the hog pit (where those of us who wish to stay constructive can no longer participate.)

The only way to keep the mildly constructive forum actually constructive is to stop the hitting. There are various forum moderation strategies and tools for doing so.

reimesu

@faraday Ghost is already on two strikes. The third one, on any thread, is a ban. What more would you suggest?

Devrex

I recommend you mute/ignore/block whichever person this could ever be about that surely isn't me.

Given you falsely accused me of insulting you when I was scrupulously polite to you, did not apologize for blatantly telling me to fuck off, did not apologize for your graphic language, did not apologize for making false accusations and casting aspersions on darn near everyone here, and are giggle-dancing all over the place as you continue stirring the pot, I do believe I, for one, am going to go right ahead and take this most excellent advice.

Bless your heart, @Ghost.

faraday

@reimesu said in The Case Against Real PBs:

What more would you suggest?

Clearer community guidelines. (I like the Discourse rules of civil discourse myself, but YMMV). Were Ghost's graphic posts out of bounds? I dunno. They bugged me and a few others, but the current guidelines aren't clear enough for me to know. There's also a lot of snark tolerated in "mildly constructive" that I personally don't find constructive, but I've always been in the minority there.
Removing posts that violate community guidelines. Leaving them around just invites escalated responses, harms those who were personally attacked, and muddies the waters about what can and can't be said.
An escalating punishment strategy; for example: 1 warning, timeout, longer timeout, permanent ban.
Being consistent about the enforcement of the rules. I called Gany out for being out of bounds (and they agreed!) but no mod did.

If you look at this thread and genuinely believe that it has on the whole stayed "civil", "constructive", and "on topic" (per the rules of engagement), then we are on very different pages about what that means. I count at least two, maybe three people who have bounced or blocked based on the convo here.

Also I'm not suggesting Ghost (or anyone else) be banned here. I'm suggesting that more active and consistent moderation can keep it from getting to that point in the first place.

Ghost

@faraday said in The Case Against Real PBs:

Being consistent about the enforcement of the rules. I called Gany out for being out of bounds (and they agreed!) but no mod did.

Please be careful. I wouldn't want you to face retaliation for defending someone; even if your point is valid.