MU Soapbox

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Muxify
    • Mustard
    1. Home
    2. Ganymede
    3. Best
    • Profile
    • Following 2
    • Followers 15
    • Topics 44
    • Posts 7499
    • Best 4335
    • Controversial 89
    • Groups 2

    Best posts made by Ganymede

    • RE: MU Things I Love

      Act I, Scene iii

      (At a dinner party)

      Host: Okay, okay! So, we're going to play a game! We'll all pick random questions out of this hat and ask them of everyone else in turn. (Everyone picks out their question) Okay, so you start, Guest 1.

      Guest 1: If you could have dinner with three people, who would they be and why?

      Guest 2: Oh, definitely <three historical figures>.

      Host: Oh, those are good! Umm. I'd pick <three other historical figures>.

      My PC: My two cousins and my one cousin's daughter, so I can see them one last time.

      Pause.

      Guest 1: I gotta run. (departs)

      Guest 2: Okay, my turn. If you could witness one event in history, what would it be any why?

      Host: Oh, that's a good one! Well, definitely <this event>.

      My PC: My recently-departed family perished in a fire. I would want to witness how they were killed and who did it. (Beat.) I'm sorry, everyone, but they died horribly and I'm thinking of the unspeakably horrible things I am going to do to who killed them.

      Pause.

      My PC: Um, so, my question. (Beat.) If you could make up your own holiday, what would it be and -- (Pause.) -- how would you celebrate it? (Smile.)

      FIN.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Health and Wealth and GrownUp Stuff

      @derp

      Okay, let's talk about it.

      Let's start with that first study. I almost feel as if you stopped reading at the abstract. Later on, it talks about the fact that patients who are able to maintain their losses long-term need to be studied further.

      There are likely many factors that account for the ability of some patients to achieve and maintain large weight losses over the long term whereas others experience substantial weight regain. Unravelling the biological, psychosocial, educational, and environmental determinants of such individual variability will be an active area of obesity research for the foreseeable future.

      There is also the recommendation that managing weight loss requires ongoing attention.

      Long term behavioral changes and obesity management require ongoing attention. Even the highest quality short-term interventions are unlikely to yield continued positive outcomes without persisting intervention and support. Several studies show that ongoing interaction with healthcare providers or in group settings significantly improves weight maintenance and long-term outcomes, compared with treatments that end after a short period of time. The importance of long-term intervention has been codified in the obesity treatment guidelines, which state that weight loss interventions should include long term comprehensive weight loss maintenance programs that continue for at least 1 year.

      Like, I don't think anyone said it was easy. I can attest that it isn't easy. But quitting smoking wasn't easy either, and I still fight that fucking addiction every damn day like a recovering heroin addict. The article contains a slew of strategies for maintaining weight loss.

      And like my cigarette addiction -- I fucking want a cigarette right now -- I know that I will have to continue to fight. It is exhausting at times. And while no one strategy works for everyone -- I will say that over, and over, and tell people over and over that keto does not work for everyone -- and each strategy may require life-long maintenance, there is no doubt that obesity is linked to a lot of health problems and that avoiding it or getting away from that state of being is a good thing.

      I realize that fat-shaming and dieting can cause psychological damage to those who cannot seem to lose the weight, but I refuse to believe this is a damned-if-you-do-or-don't situation. If anyone wants to lose weight, I'll cheer them on, and if they relapse I will still cheer them on because addictions, obesity, and cancer are all fucking monsters that aren't easy to beat but, dammit, I'm in your corner if you're going to give it a go.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: The Desired Experience

      @ominous

      I don’t because it presumes I can afford more than four sandwiches.

      If that’s all I got? That’s all I got. If you want to exclude me from the pot luck, so be it, but if there are others hauling in the goods, what’s the problem?

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Health and Wealth and GrownUp Stuff

      @macha said in Health and Wealth and GrownUp Stuff:

      It is 20% - at least. Which means it's never less than at least 5 bucks.

      Same. I'm usually tipping 20-25% on DoorDash for my orders, and I order for 4. Sure, $80 is stiff for some Red Robin but when I don't want to fucking move, I pay the price for it.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: The Desired Experience

      @Carma

      @faraday said in The Desired Experience:

      Most Sandwich Clubs I've encountered (including the ones I've personally been a part of) are not 100% insular. They may prefer playing with each other, but there's enough tangential encounters that anything you give to them has a chance to spill out to the rest of the game -- especially if the thing you give them leads to some kind of public event, or requires support from the science department, or whatever.

      This is really important.

      Sandwich Clubs don't usually start because people want to ignore the rest of the game. I think that Sandwich Clubs come about because people can only make so many sandwiches and want to share them with people they are familiar with or, at the least, are not likely to be stalked or harassed by. (Let's not pretend this doesn't happen.)

      I am happy to give my sandwiches to whoever wants a sandwich, but I only have so many sandwiches. I prefer to give my sandwiches to people who will not demand all of my sandwiches because I like to share them and interact to do so. When I end up having to give all my sandwiches to one person I feel sad and unbalanced. I don't last long.

      So the people I let into my Sandwich Club are the sort of people who understand that I only have so many sandwiches to give. Nonetheless, they like my sandwiches and I like to share them. If others want to come and enjoy my sandwiches, that's great too; however, as more people come to try the sandwiches, the amount of sandwich to share becomes smaller and so sometimes it is less enjoyable.

      As long as people respect how many sandwiches a person can make, I think the gaming experience for all will improve.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: RL Anger

      @Derp said in RL Anger:

      So, as noted, while Mietze is perfectly justified in her suspicion and actions, there is potentially another side of the story, here. One in which the man is not The Devil. And I was merely trying to make the point that, sometimes, people can show up and want to get in touch with no moustache-twirling involved.

      I hope you can see that what's happening on the man's side here is irrelevant. If @mietze is justified in her reaction, then that's where the discussion ought to stop.

      But, on the man's side for a moment: if you lack the social awareness that showing up at someone's work to compliment them on something that occurred 30 years ago is not the right thing to do, then, as I think I said in another topic, you're too stupid to remain alive.

      Stupidity and innocence are two different concepts.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: The Desired Experience

      @tinuviel said in The Desired Experience:

      But nobody external to the group or individual making the choices gets to decide on just cause.

      Except staff.

      I am wholly supportive of staff who require interaction when a player has a PC that is part of integral to the plot or IC social structure. If a Sandwich Club is in positions of importance, it is reasonable for staff to step in and have them make a choice: relinquish your positions of IC authority or interact with others. And staff should step in under those premises.

      Otherwise, we're all just in the peanut gallery.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: RL Anger

      @surreality said in RL Anger:

      Holy motherfucking shit, what in the actual hell is wrong with people? <rubs face endlessly>

      File a grievance with your state board for the practice of medicine. It's not a malpractice claim: it's putting the rest of the profession on notice that this guy is a fuckwit.

      Please. I encourage people to file legal grievances because it's the professional equivalent of calling the cops on a lawyer to investigate them for potential ethical wrongdoing. It hardly ever comes up with anything substantive, but standards go lax when people think that the cops aren't sniffing around.

      posted in Tastes Less Game'y
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning

      @Auspice

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Emotional separation from fictional content

      @Ghost said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

      Yourself having a food allergy, I hope you didn't feel like I was belittling people with such allergies. The statement wasn't about excluding people with allergies as a whole, but the all around risk in vague relation to MU-hobby.

      If you think I thought you were belittling my people, I say to you: nigga plz.

      To be blunt, I roll my eyes at the thought of risk in gaming. In my opinion, if the thought of risk in MUing comes across your mind, you should probably not MU at all, just as I would remind the average xenophobe that they ought to avoid playing Mass Effect games because omg fucking aliens is unpatriotic dey took err jerbz. There shouldn't be any risk in playing on MUs, and I believe this is @surreality's position.

      I concur with it.

      But it's impossible to predict exactly what risk exists. No one could have predicted that my partner would have a psychotic break one day at practice for A Streetcar Named Desire because she had repressed a sexual assault that she suffered in college. She never told me; she didn't tell anyone; but that made it no less scary or disturbing. But the issue was addressed quickly and calmly, and things returned to normal, because the people involved were empathetic, sympathetic, and caring. And I believe this is @faraday's position: you cannot stop all harms, no matter how many warnings you give, and no matter how aware people are, because trauma is a strange, disturbing, scary thing that pops up without warning a lot.

      I'm going to keep eating at restaurants because I'm a foodie, and while I may not be able to enjoy everything everywhere, I still enjoy lots of it many places. The best we can do as a community is try to be accommodating without throttling the themes that we want to explore in relative safety.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Sexual themes in roleplay

      @Arkandel said:

      We're talking about slightly different things, Gany.

      No, we aren't. You said this:

      You may always, always, ALWAYS fade-to-black

      and that's about it. It's all we can do. (Emphasis added.)

      And you're wrong. That's not all we can do.

      We can recognize that our IC actions have OOC consequences. We can recognize that RPing on MUs is inherently cooperative. We can engage in considerate, measured RP that doesn't force people into situations they don't want to play through.

      In short, there's a shit-ton that we can do to make RPing on MUs more fun and less painful. Most don't because it's easier not to give a shit, and just fade-to-black.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Something Completely Different

      I did not tell Tinuviel that I would remove Derp.

      I explained to Tinuviel what I believed to be the issue that caused the problem in the Politics thread, which was my failure to lay out my expectations to Derp when he took the position. I also explained I did not think it was fair to hold Derp accountable for an undisclosed expectation, and how I asked him to "stay out of the fray," which largely meant not to post anything further in any of the topics.

      This was also explained to krmbm.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: NOLA 2: Back in the Vieux

      @RubyRhod

      Tony's @mail is a classic case of gaslighting.

      Bourbon's decision to remove him or ask him to leave because they didn't want to deal with him is perfectly reasonable.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Web portals and scenes and grids oh my!

      @faraday said in Web portals and scenes and grids oh my!:

      There may be some additional cultural issues with the introduction of asynchronous RP, but but let's be honest - there were always some pitfalls in joining a scene.

      While this may be true, there are players who don't care for asynchronous RP. I think Sunny and I fall into that category.

      Arx permits asynchronous RP through flashbacks, but if those was the only kind of RP available I would not be playing there.

      I have never done asynchronous RP on an Ares-based game and I don't intend to. If it appears that asynchronous RP is the only or most likely kind of RP I'm going to get, I'm not going to play there.

      That's all.

      I've got no problems with the Ares platform. I think it's great! I just don't like asynchronous RP, and I see it cropping up on Ares games more and more as the key to involvement in plots. I could be wrong but this is the impression I get.

      And this is totally okay, I don't need to be part of or like everything.

      posted in Game Development
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: How can we incentivize IC failure?

      @ghost said in How can we incentivize IC failure?:

      Like a TT player I'd try to stay in my lane and not try to Hog the scene, but then someone(s) would just bowl over that goodwill, try to do everything, and try to Hog all the attention/xp. Left me feeling like my fairness and trying to be conscientious of others was being taken advantage of. I know it made me passive aggressive more than once.

      This reminds me of a time on BSG:U where we grunts were all on a mission to free some prisoners. We split into teams in order to deal with the situation, with some folks (who were good with guns) looking out for trouble while other folks (who were good with sneaking) went in and tried to do their thing. If I recall correctly, things went horribly wrong, with half the team going down at some point, but we did manage to get the prisoners out, and get back to base. And this was due to the scene-runner creating a situation where everyone could shine, even if some of us failed to do so.

      That scene-runner was Faraday.

      Faraday's game made it really difficult to do everything. You couldn't fly a fighter and be a ground-pounder. If you were a Marine, you couldn't be a great shooter and also a great auxiliary. So it made it easier (and this is not to take away from how good she was at managing scenes) for any scene-runner to allow everyone to take their place.

      Ultimately, aside from player-restrictions, the only way to ensure that everyone is having a good time is to have staff who are competent at doing this. This is not an easy task. But you can also select game mechanics or a system that assist staff in this task. So, in my opinion, your game mechanics or system is critical in the task of ensuring that everyone is having a good time because you cannot control the limitations of your players and are never guaranteed the quality of staff you have.

      posted in Reviews and Debates
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: How low can "low stakes" be and still be compelling for RP?

      @fatefan said in How low can "low stakes" be and still be compelling for RP?:

      Is "trying to make sure your pet goats survive the storm while your neighbor seeks to take your land" a compelling enough plot for a handful of characters (rather than, say, being the "downtime" scenes in between more epic drama)? Or is that sort of genre likely to become boring quickly?

      Someone taking your livestock or land is pretty "high stakes" for a peasant.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Crimson Dynasties -- A Vampire: The Requiem 2e MUSH set in modern Beijing

      @shangdi said in Crimson Dynasties -- A Vampire: The Requiem 2e MUSH set in modern Beijing:

      Game shuttered due to inactivity. I may make another attempt at a CofD 2e game in MUSH form in the future. In the meantime, I am taking constructive criticism as to what I did wrong, and what could have made this more successful.

      I think the setting may have been a little too "foreign" for the average WoD MUSH player.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: What Would it Take to Repair the Community?

      Briefly, I concur with Kestrel.

      @simplications said in What Would it Take to Repair the Community?:

      If someone is acting in a problematic way on a game you're on, you should take it to the game runners.

      Recently, I did this.

      What happened was something that isn't close to the level of Cullen, et al. It was apparent from the response that the game runner was aware of the issue. Regardless, I brought receipts; however, I know of nothing that was done to address the situation. That lack of action was one of the reasons I lost interest in the game.

      This story has occurred many times in my 25+ years.

      Going to the game runners is never a guarantee of action and brings with it a threat of exposure because, as Kestrel pointed out, that person may be good friends with staff. And if you want to stay on that game, you are potentially putting yourself in a difficult spot, one that might one day lead to your departure or start a whisper campaign against you.

      That's why the original incarnation of this place was created.

      They have the opportunity to hear what you have to say, possibly compare it to other reports they may have heard, and get the other side of the story from the accused.

      To what end?

      Due process is meant to guarantee the rights of the accused; however, no player has any cognizable right on any game, save for what is promised by staff. Staff who think they can adequately or properly investigate a situation in a manner that promptly and completely addresses it is kidding themselves or lying to players. Games by design are at best benevolent dictatorships and at worst a god-fantasy out of Black and White. So the only reason anyone would want to follow an investigatory procedure is doing so to protect their own sense of self-righteousness.

      If the best one can hope to be is a beloved tyrant, it serves no purpose to pretend to be anything else.

      As for the value of speaking here as opposed to game runners:

      @Kestrel said in What Would it Take to Repair the Community?:

      When abusers are banned, there are always people who are like, 'Wow that seems unjust. I happen to know his cat's uncle and he's a great guy. Maybe staff are the real abusers and banned him for no reason?' But when there's a public thread full of people coming out of the woodwork to put their hands up and say, 'This happened to me too,' it's a lot less sus.

      Reporting has value. And a person can report what happened here. It is not difficult to make a report that follows the forum's rules, in my opinion, like so:

      The player of Cullen was banned on two other games for his behavior. On Game X, the player, who went by the name "Azazello", approached me by page complementing my PC's played-by photo. He said that he thought the actress was cute and that he always wanted to have sex with them. I stopped communicating with him at that point.

      (This is a fictional account.) Even with the rules here, it is simple to report someone's behavior. Stick with what happened. Take quotes if desired. I hope that people will do so moving forward.

      posted in Reviews and Debates
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: Make MSB great again!

      @three-eyed-crow said in Make MSB great again!:

      The ad section is my only major complaint with the forum that I actually want to press for change on. I don't think it has any use at all as an advertising platform at the moment.

      Stop stealing my ideas.

      But, yes, this. Keep advertising free-and-clear of negativity. Open up a Yelp! section for honest/dishonest reviews of the game. Mark clearly.

      Most importantly, police each other politely.

      posted in Mildly Constructive
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • RE: The 100: The Mush

      @Miss-Demeanor said in The 100: The Mush:

      Uhhhhhhhh, because its NOT just me personally? Have you... been paying any attention at all or do you just pop up now and then to troll the thread for giggles?

      I've been paying attention.

      Just because staff have a vision that they want to adhere to doesn't mean the game is a sandbox.

      Just because staff does not execute that vision well doesn't mean the game is a sandbox.

      Just because staff seems to favor the more active and vocal players doesn't mean the game is a sandbox.

      What makes a game a sandbox is where the game appeals and pleases only the staff and the players that they favor. This does not seem to be the case. Your impressions, measured against the experiences of others, leads to an inconclusive impression.

      My personal tastes don't give me license to declare a place a sandbox.

      posted in Adver-tis-ments
      Ganymede
      Ganymede
    • 1
    • 2
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
    • 10
    • 11
    • 216
    • 217
    • 9 / 217