Best posts made by Auspice

@RightMeow said in RL things I love:

@Auspice Does he think this song (thread) is about him?

He'd love it if it were.

He brings his shih tzu to work sometimes.
She has her own wardrobe, ofc. She was Wonder Woman yesterday.

I don't know who plays Laurent on SGM, but this is a shout out (love letter?) to her.

She proved me wrong on the idea of voluntelling a player to be first to pose in a PRP and in the most wonderful way. I was very hesitant about the concept, but she's now utilized it twice and it worked beautifully. She didn't just tell them to pose: she gave them the tools they need. She chose a different person each time and it came across more as a highlight of the player rather than putting them on the spot.

But really, thank you for putting proof to concept in regards to asking someone to be first to pose in a scene and adding in that facet of telling them what you want to see in the pose. It worked far, far better than I thought it would and I am happy to admit I was wrong in my hesitation.

@tek said in The Work Thread:

Me: "...the children?"

You're not wrong.

We're just on a roll for game theory lately. I love it.
Something I'd like to discuss: the role of Staff and players alike in handling app rejections.

I think we all suffer a measure of anxiety when we see our app was rejected. Even though I've had plenty of times where the rejection is Staff helping me tighten up or giving me insight on how I can improve where my character fits into the game, I still fret before reading it in a flash of 'oh god they hate me.'

And as app staff, I sometimes wring my hands before hitting enter on a rejection in a: 'oh god they're gonna think I hate them.'

As I said: I've had app rejections help me improve my character. Unfortunately, I've also had ones that were nothing but negativity.

Which comes to those 'roles' I was talking about.

I think it's the role of Staff to... make sure you start out the rejection response with what you liked. Paradox and I strive to always do this. (Between his being a teacher and my experience in corporate-level training, we're both familiar with the concept of feedback-with-compliments) 'We really like your concept of...' 'We love what you wrote in your background about...'

And the rejections/recommendations should always be made with a mind of what's best for the game. You might have a really cool app, but if it'd be a conflict for the game or turn out to be really difficult to play on the game, I'm going to deny it (as a hypothetical: someone could come in and give me the coolest app ever for a bartender in Colorado Springs, but I'd have to reject it because the person in question would get almost no RP).

Staff should also look for ways they can help players in the approval process. I don't mean 'page people while CGing to tell them what to do.' I mean if you look at an app (FS3 in this example) and they've spent only 38 of the 40 starting points and they have just a Competent in Athletics when you think their BG justifies a Great... tell them. I 100% have rejected more than one app on SGM just to say 'Hey, I think your character needs a higher score in <skill>.' Don't let someone hobble themselves out of the gate.

I think it's the role of Players to... gracefully accept a rejection. Approach it with the understanding that Staff is looking out for what's best for both you and the game. Respect their vision and go in with the (polite) expectation that they'll respect yours. It may require some meeting in the middle and you may give up a bit more ground than them, but in the end: it's their game.

Players should also understand that a rejection of their app isn't a rejection of them. It's not a 'you're bad and you should feel bad.' It's looking out for you to have the best experience possible. So yeah, feel bummed for a few minutes that your initial app wasn't approved, but then sit back, read over what they said, and try to apply it.

There's also nothing wrong with feeling a need to defend an idea. Maybe it just wasn't clear enough on the first time. If you absolutely feel your character needs that 3 in Basketweaving: say so. But for each thing you 'take,' there should be some 'give.' If you want Staff to give in to you, be willing to give in to them. 'Yeah, I see your point about my Legendary in Composure when I have an RP hook about having anger management issues. But I do feel that I need to be an expert in underwater basketweaving because of the years in Tibet learning from a monk. I've written more in my BG to expand on that.'

Players have a responsibility to make a character that fits into the game and approaches Staff's vision for the game.
Staff has a responsibility to help players make that character, while respecting the player's vision for the character.

And both have a responsibility to treat one another with respect.

omfg

A section of this training guide that had been 'backburnered' got shoved to the forefront today and I dug through OneNote to start gathering my notes on it and discovered I already wrote an entire outline for the section at some point.

THANKS PAST SELF.

@Sunny said in Consent in Gaming:

@faraday said in Consent in Gaming:

We're here to tell stories and roleplay. Generally speaking that means actually playing the scenes. It's one thing to avoid a torture scene because torture makes people squicky. But somebody 'nope-ing' out of a "get yelled at by the commander" scene just because it was ICly embarrassing is cheapening the reason why the FTB option exists. I'd still honor the request, but I think it would lower my opinion of that player considerably.

I do not understand. Why would it lower your opinion of them?

ETA: I know this could sound confrontational but I REALLY don't mean it that way, I seriously am reading this and not comprehending why and hoping it can be explained so I do understand.

I'm in agreement with Faraday.

She plays a lot of military themed games, same as I do. And there are absolutely people who want to play the rule breaker, the problematic soldier, etc..... which is a headache for their ic superiors and often other players in general.

If you purposefully choose to play that type and then want to nope out of the consequences? It's pretty shitty. And unfortunately pretty common.

So I didn't get myself a weighted blanket during the Target sale cause the one I'd've wanted had already sold out.

.....got home today to a package. My mom had seen the same sale and bought me one.

totally gonna fall asleep in my desk chair under this thing

@Ganymede said in Consent in Gaming:

Point 2: I have actually had someone say to me 'that doesn't sound like fun' to a suggestion I made recently.

And expecting someone to provide alternatives is, in my opinion, valid.

You know who I get annoyed at? Let's call him, in this example, George.

George: Who wants to RP?
Me: Sure, where to?
George: Oh, I dunno. Where would your character be?
Me: Place A, Place B, Place C, maybe even Place D. But I can come up with something for just about anywhere.
George: I don't want to RP in any of those places.
Me: So where would your character be?
George: I dunno.
Me: Well....what might he be doing right now?
George: I dunno.
Me: Okay, well we could try Thing 1, Thing 2, Thing 3....
George: I don't really like any of those.

Someone can drag it out to this point once. Once.
After that, if they just ask for RP without putting anything up, I shrug and move on.

'That's not fun for me' and similar fall into the same mental category. It's someone who just cares about their personal (receipt) of entertainment and no one else's. This idea of 'consent' broadening into 'things I don't feel like RPing right now' is sort of the same, IMO.

If you're not comfortable with graphic depictions of grisly death, awesome. Say it up front in combat and I will make sure that things are glossed over.

If you just want me to serve to provide you entertainment entirely on your terms: we ain't RPing. Period.

I'm thankful that I have a job right now where the people are as awesome as they are.

@Seamus said in Cyberrun:

In the eyes of the law, a 20 year old with a mental capacity of 13 might as well as be a child, regardless of their physical age.

I think what disturbs me most is that the original comment ('I know I'd personally find a 20 year old with the mental age of a 13 year old a lot more disturbing...') implies they'd be totally OK with sex with a 13-year-old who is 'mature for their age.'

When I was 15/16, I actually pulled out my ID on three separate occasions to prove to people I wasn't 20+. I developed young, so I looked older than I was (to the extent that twice I got offered/served alcohol without question while out with my parents).

That 'maturity' and shit didn't matter when a guy who was 21 began trying to hook up with me while I was 15. The whole rest of the group came down on it.

Physical or mental: sex with someone underage is wrong.

Went to a Christmas party tonight. All gifts for the white elephant had to be handmade (hence the gloves I made).

I think I won =O

This table is amazing. It got stolen a lot (I actually started the stealing to try to claim it >.>), but managed to snag it in the end. Yesssss.

@Rinel said in Cyberrun:

I don't support it in MU*s because of the high probability of minors accessing those games.

This is really the crux of the discussion here.
Minors do access MUs. Maybe not in the volume and frequency they did when we were all teenagers, but they do.

And ousting pedophiles from our community is something we can all work together to do, vs. trying to play it off as 'well it's not video....' 'well it's not in person....' Except how many of us do engage in OOC/RL friendship/communication? How easy does a MU make that to happen? Pages, @mails... these aren't monitored for player safety.

So I am 100% behind disallowing this behavior to be engaged in on any level within our community.

I dunno who did it, but someone brought in Starbucks and Krispy Kreme for the whole floor this morning.

@RDC said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:

This whole thread is yet another reason why monogamy -astounds- and -confuses- me. I don't do it IC or IRL, and it kind of solves all these problems.

So I've mulled over this for a moment and I think @Arkandel is correct.

I've had my time as poly IRL. I've come to realize it's not for me, personally (but I do have a full understanding of it). However, I have played characters who are poly or who simply are happy having multiple partners (I have one right now, in fact).

Sometimes, it works out well (see: current character). However, I've had some go awry.

Scenario 1: (@Ghost in fact will remember this) We approach other person, say hey, thematically this is cool, we'd like to do this, are you OK with it? Nothing has been RP'd yet, nothing decided. Third party says yeah! I am! So we begin playing it out. Third party.... begins RPing as if she's being slighted, jilted, cheated on. Begins telling Ghost that he's triggering her RL issues from her husband cheating on her. Begins telling people OOCly that I like to 'ruin relationships.' What we were told and what happened? Totally different.

Scenario 2: Told player A 'hey, my character is poly, doesn't commit to one person,' A is cool with it. They start seeing B also, tell B the same thing. Both A and B (who didn't ICly know about each other but didn't NEED to) start trying to vie more and more and more for commitment, monogamy, my time IC and OOC, until I had to break it off with both.

I think Scenario 2 is much more common than 1 at least. 1 was a nightmare. 2, however, is sadly not a solution. When we really really like an RP partner, we can get clingy to them. And this isn't just for romance. I've had people do it to me just over 'friendship' or adventuring or...

Sometimes, monogamy is the easy route even if I'm not always a huge fan (cause commitment is terrifying).

@Aria said in Good or New Movies Review:

@Ganymede

still better than Twilight

@Sunny said in TS - Danger zone:

Some people are crazy so you should feel bad having fun ever again.

I do feel bad.
please, tell me what a bad, bad girl I am.

@Ganymede said in Good or New Movies Review:

I am reminded of the oft-maligned suggestion that if one thinks they can run a game better they should make one of their own.

Hasn't that been the issue? Star Wars fans convinced they can do better and thus the movies are terrible in comparison to whatever they cooked up themselves?

My male chars get hit on far more than my female chars.
¯\__(ツ)_/¯

You are literally sending data over an unprotected means of communication.

If you are so hyper concerned about omg my text sex might be read by someone.........why are you even posting here? This isn't ultra secure communication.

Even WhatsApp has been proven to not be as secure as they claim.

The deal is: any MU out there can slap a flag on you and start monitoring everything you say or do.
Any server admin can start recording everything on a game.

You have to realize no matter what game you're on, the potential is there.

You just need to be gaming places where the staff has the integrity not to abuse aforementioned potential.

I've left games because I realize (or have it proven) that I can't trust staff not to be abusive in their power. But by and far, I realize most staff has far more important and better things to do with their time than to watch me TS.

.....and if they are watching me TS? I hope I'm entertaining at least.