@Tinuviel said in How to Approach (nor not) a Suspected Creep:
ending sentences with a preposition.
...has been acceptable for generations and the prohibition against such was prescriptivist bullshit from people that wanted to make English sound more like Latin, so nyah.
@faraday said in How to Approach (nor not) a Suspected Creep:
We do have a problem with players tromping over boundaries, harassing other players and just generally being creepy sometimes when it comes to IC relationships.
Yeah, that's why I said if there's an OOC component it could be actionable. I'm not oblivious that there are assholes out there in the hobby, and I've booted more than my fair share of those people, as anyone who's actually staffed with me can probably attest. The other side of this coin is that not everything has to have a full-on procedurally correct trial. If you, as a gamerunner, feel that someone is being a disruptive influence for your game, and making your other players uncomfortable, you can boot them even if they haven't explicitly violated the letter of the law.
This is all a game of balance. There's no perfect solution. If there was we would have found it ages ago and this wouldn't be an issue.
@Auspice said in How to Approach (nor not) a Suspected Creep:
'You're the only one for me'
'Name blushes profusely as she looks his way'
The white knight, the overly romantic 'husband' material ........ who is somehow in a deeply committed relationship with multiple women at the same time.
Those are the creeps we usually see pop up.
...But the guy who seems to be collecting a harem of women meant to be latched onto him and him alone while he's juggling six of them? That's fucked up.
You know, I would see a red flag here. Just not the one you're seeing.
This is all IC, in that scenario. Character presents as white knight material, but is secretly something else.
That's fine. If you report that to me, I'll advise you to act on it IC. Go talk to the other women. Have them run into each other and start talking about their boyfriend, and put the pieces together. Go full-on Carrie Underwood and have them take a baseball bat to his shiny pickup and carve their names into his leather seats.
But if you ask staff to make a judgment about a player based on the actions of his PC, I'm probably going to red flag that, because that is a pretty distinct blurring of IC/OOC lines. That, to me, is a red flag.
Can you imagine what sort of hobby this would be if all of us were judged OOC based on the actions of our PCs? (Moreso than we already are.)
Every Daeva would be a secret rapist. Every werewolf would be a violent psychopath. Every superhero would be dangerously delusional.
If there's some kind of OOC component, that might be actionable. But if it's just IC? Ngh.
Look, I like you too, and we tend to get along in these things, but in this case, I think you're just flat-out wrong. And that's fine. We don't have to agree on everything.
I told you when I would be willing to act, in multiple scenarios, and when I think it's inappropriate to act. In this situation, I think that it's inappropriate for me to act. I think it's also inappropriate for you to act.
But different games will have different standards. There is no universal here.
All I can do is give my own perspective.
ETA: To make the 'as a player and a staffer' clear --
As a player, I wouldn't do shit because it's none of my damned business. If someone says something to me, then I'll direct it to the people whose business it is, and encourage said player to do the same.
@Arkandel said in How to Approach (nor not) a Suspected Creep:
Sometimes it can be as easy as paging someone with a simple "hey, it came to my attention Bob has been flirting with your character pretty heavily. I'm just checking if that's okay with you".
Sure.
And sometimes that behavior can be problematic on its own.
Staff paging you out of the blue about a scenario that you're enjoying? Is a good way to make your players paranoid that you're spying on them, or secretly disapprove of their behavior and are low-key letting them know that you're keeping an eye on them.
Look, sometimes, less is more. You want me to do something? All you have to do is tell me to do something.
That also isn't the scenario that you originally presented. Your scenario was 'I see behavior that I think might be creepy but I am afraid / don't know how to approach the other person about it'. Not 'person has come to me and said that something is making them uncomfortable'.
Those are two distinctly different scenarios. In the event that you come to me and say 'hey, person X says that they are uncomfortable with situation Y', I will thank you for bringing it to my attention and go speak to person X.
@Auspice said in How to Approach (nor not) a Suspected Creep:
Because your response is basically: 'I don't give a shit as a player or a staffer.'
That was not my response. I specifically said that I would act on it if a complaint is lodged, and do so swiftly. That is not at all 'not giving a shit'.
'Well sure you have logs and evidence of this behavior and the threats against the victim, but the VICTIM hasn't said anything so......... welp. this person can keep doing what they're doing.'
So, let me just say this bluntly -- you, as a third party, don't get to decide that someone is a victim of anything. Period. That is a decision between the affected person and the adjudicator of fact. You can believe that someone is a victim, and encourage them to speak up, but you don't get to slap that label on them.
Ok, so first -- you asked what we would do, if anything, and I told you what I would do and how I think as both a player and a staffer , so you wanna pull back the aggression a bit? I wasn't accusing you of doing anything, or telling you how to behave. I was telling you how I view it.
Second, if you come to me as a third party in the matter, my very first question is going to be did the other person say something to you? Because I truly believe it's not your place to police them, either. So you're right. I won't do anything because you're essentially asking me to police the fun of two other people, neither of which have said anything at all to me, even though I make it very clear that they can.
Different players have different standards that might differ from yours, or mine. That's fine. That's to be expected when dealing with homo sapiens. They're a strange creature.
My thoughts on this are, both as a player and a staffer:
I am not your dad. It's not my job to decide for you what is or is not appropriate for you. If a player acts in a way that you feel is inappropriate for you, then it's your job to take the first step, either by telling the other player or telling me.
I very rarely step in and tell people to knock something off IC unless I receive a complaint about it first. OOC is a slightly different matter, but IC? You are empowered to raise your voice. I make it very clear that you are empowered to raise your voice. If you don't do that, then that's on you. I'll act swiftly if you lodge a complaint and provide evidence or examples of the behavior that you're talking about.
But if you don't even do that? Then how am I, or anyone else, supposed to know that you aren't ok with this? My job is to provide fun, either as a staffer or a character. Not to sit and hawk over everyone to make sure that whatever artificial boundary exists in my head is being honored by the entirety of everyone.
Christ, that sounds exhausting. Even just dealing with the complaints that get formally lodged is exhausting.
@Arkandel said in Health and Wealth and GrownUp Stuff:
Losing fat, barring medical conditions, is very similar to balancing a budget; you find out your TDEE (basically your caloric balance) and then eat under that. Free (or very cheap) apps like MyFitnessPal help track and accomplish the latter.
That's it. If you exercise while you're at it you'll also lose relatively little muscle while you're eating at a deficit, which accelerates the fat loss.
No. It's really, really not. And that's exactly the kind of received wisdom that most of us have to contend with.
For the average person, that might work, but for many of us, it doesn't. At all. Caloric deficits result in a loss of muscle mass before fat mass even when training regularly, and there are conditions like @Auspice's where this wisdom doesn't work.
So thanks, but I've been living with this and researching it for the better part of two decades, and that doesn't actually work for everyone.
It's really hard for me to lose fat. I don't really understand why. I have TONS of muscle, and DEXA scans show that I am somehow pretty fuckin' jacked under the fat. But the fat just refuses to come off. Like -- it doesn't matter what my macros are, or what my calorie intake is. I will lose muscle mass before I lose fat mass. Always.
But I have regular blood pressure, regular cholesterol, can run several miles without getting winded and can squat twice my bodyweight, deadlift even more.
It's annoying. I'm in better shape than most of my friends but you would never be able to tell just from looking at me.
Point of all that being: Weight really isn't an indicator of anything truly important. Go get other benchmarks tested.
I lose lose one about every six months on average. They slip out of place far more frequently, but back in easy enough once you learn to feel where they are, especially if your eyes are dry.
Is there?!
Anyways all the stuff I like is dead simple. White chocolate pretzels. Green bean casserole.
We should rename this thread and just do general recipes, lol.
@Ghost said in Why We Don't Make New Friends Anymore (Or Creepers Do Creepy Things):
The Canal Killer was prominent in the AZ cosplay/con scene and was known for driving around in a retrofitted 80s police cruiser covered in fake blood with ZOMBIE HUNTER on the back of it.
Those people were already dead! You cannot murder an animated corpse!
You live FAR, FAR AWAY, Donkey!
@Rinel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Something like 80% of my past week's meals have been soup. The same soup.
I feel guilty for complaining about this because it's a really lovely soup and this is first world problems to the max... but I really don't want any more soup. ;_;
...what kind of soup? Wanna trade for some pasta? 
@insomniac7809 said in RL Anger:
@Darren Yeah. Just think, if they'd up and die already, it'd do wonders for your commute.
...to be clear, that was sarcasm, you human excrement; you're the sort of person who makes me wish God was real just so there would be a lake of fire waiting for you.
Despite the fact that studies and like, two seconds worth of rational thought show that giving money to people directly is a poor way to help the poor, and that many are doing it because it's easy and lucrative to harass people directly until they get paid to go away, which only breeds more of the negative behaviors that hurt the community as a whole, your outrage continues when @Darren says that he doesn't give money to them directly because it supports negative behaviors?
So, what, professionals who work to make things stretch as far as possible to help the needy and sociologists who study this to find out what's going down just don't know what they're talking about because it leads to insufficient outrage?
Totally not saying that being a professional panhandler isn't lucrative. It is. I've seen it. Why I was saying is that being a professional panhandler won't get you into a life where being a panhandler is no longer necessary.
I have to disagree.
I've known way too many folks that have been strippers or prostitutes who ended up cleaning themselves up and flying straight again. It took some time and better choices in life, but I refuse to believe that one profession or another somehow pigeon-holes you. After all, my partner did go from Sith to Jedi, so I have to believe there is some hope for me too.
...yes, it is possible to better yourself through good choices. That's... still not the point I was making.
You know what? Nevermind. Not worth it.
Totally not saying that being a professional panhandler isn't lucrative. It is. I've seen it. Why I was saying is that being a professional panhandler won't get you into a life where being a panhandler is no longer necessary. Professionalizing your skill cements it further, it doesn't break you away from it, and for some reason we keep hearing from certain factions that we all just need to be willing to give to the needy.
I'll give to the needy. But I also know that those people probably aren't actually needy, they're playing you, and that charities get way more bang for their buck.
But we still have to deal with preachy bullshit from the folks who have never experienced this beyond some academic talking point.