Posts made by insomniac7809

@Rinel said in TS - Danger zone:

@insomniac7809 said in TS - Danger zone:

@Rinel said in TS - Danger zone:

@insomniac7809 said in TS - Danger zone:

If we're talking, like, magical timeline duplicates... now, that's a question that gets into the teleporter paradox. If I go into a machine, Scotty vaporizes me, and then I come back together on the other side, am I still me? If yes, what if he saves the data and pops out another of me? If no, that implies either I stop existing when my component atoms are replaced--which happens every few years--or when my consciousness stops functioning--which implies I did die during my appendectomy (or, rather, he died, I started existing when the anaesthesia wore off.) Do "I", in a discrete sense, actually exist, or am I just a collection of processes that shuffle around in the same general vicinity for a few decades, and if so, isn't a second identical bundle of processes just "more" of me?

Did you seriously just take a smut thread and turn it into a discourse on the problem of personal identity?

Fucking hell. Go read some Parfit and get out of here, nerd.

If you can answer whether duplicate sex is masturbation or incest without defining the self, then go ahead.

Maybe considering the ethical and philosophical implications of weird sex scenarios is my fetish. Ever think of that?

I'm kinkshaming you right now.

During a body swap scenario, to what extent is consent held by the body's current inhabitant vs the original owner?

@Rinel said in TS - Danger zone:

@insomniac7809 said in TS - Danger zone:

If we're talking, like, magical timeline duplicates... now, that's a question that gets into the teleporter paradox. If I go into a machine, Scotty vaporizes me, and then I come back together on the other side, am I still me? If yes, what if he saves the data and pops out another of me? If no, that implies either I stop existing when my component atoms are replaced--which happens every few years--or when my consciousness stops functioning--which implies I did die during my appendectomy (or, rather, he died, I started existing when the anaesthesia wore off.) Do "I", in a discrete sense, actually exist, or am I just a collection of processes that shuffle around in the same general vicinity for a few decades, and if so, isn't a second identical bundle of processes just "more" of me?

Did you seriously just take a smut thread and turn it into a discourse on the problem of personal identity?

Fucking hell. Go read some Parfit and get out of here, nerd.

If you can answer whether duplicate sex is masturbation or incest without defining the self, then go ahead.

Maybe considering the ethical and philosophical implications of weird sex scenarios is my fetish. Ever think of that?

A literal clone is obvs incest. It's just like an identical twin that happens to be chronologically younger.

It's masturbation if you're, like, using Space to be in two places at once.

If we're talking, like, magical timeline duplicates... now, that's a question that gets into the teleporter paradox. If I go into a machine, Scotty vaporizes me, and then I come back together on the other side, am I still me? If yes, what if he saves the data and pops out another of me? If no, that implies either I stop existing when my component atoms are replaced--which happens every few years--or when my consciousness stops functioning--which implies I did die during my appendectomy (or, rather, he died, I started existing when the anaesthesia wore off.) Do "I", in a discrete sense, actually exist, or am I just a collection of processes that shuffle around in the same general vicinity for a few decades, and if so, isn't a second identical bundle of processes just "more" of me?

These sorts of philosophical questions of existence and identity are probably beyond the scope of a TS thread, beyond the fact that it's still pretty hot whatever the answer.

@Ghost said in TS - Danger zone:

I mean, in theory, if I were writing a steamy romance novel I'd probably hand sample chapters to people including my own parents

Um, I wouldn't.

Not because of secret shame or anything but just because I don't need to ask questions about how horny any relatives of mine got.

@RightMeow said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

Me: I don't appreciate you didn't do your job at all yesterday.
T: …
T: Or that you were late getting into work.
Me: You mean getting that thing done at another area so you can get paid?
T: …
T: You shouldn't have snapped.
Me: You should try doing your job.

@Darren said in Sexuality: IC and OOC:

I thought we were supposed to have life figured out by the time we were my age

I think this is a mantra for everyone over the age of, like, 24.

@Tinuviel I mean... not to play Devil's advocate here, and freely admitting that I've been a bit of a shit in my time (trying to do better as always), but I have had some cases where I feel like the other party was feeling betrayed or hurt because they were presuming something more than I (as far as I can tell) indicated.

So while I'm not trying to say that they didn't actually feel betrayed or hurt, if there was no OOC communication and the IC interaction was a single hook-up that they took to mean a committed relationship, there is a bit of "that's on them" to my read on the situation.

So yeah, definitely don't lie to people OOC, that's just shitty. (Including by omission.) But, y'know, communicate expectations and boundaries and whatnot.

@bored I dunno what you're talking about it is super important to characterization that we hash out the details of every shuddering thrust.

As a cat person by inclination, I have long ago come to terms with the fact that love is pain.

@Jeshin there's also a thing that, even in the most IC-is-IC complete separation zero OOC expectation collaboration playstyle...

Okay, so a possibly apocryphal D&D story. Our heroes can see a room at the end of the hall, with a pile of gold in the middle. Naturally suspicious, they start asking questions. Is the treasure magical? Are there monsters in the hallway? I detect invisibility, does that show me anything? They go through their whole paranoia checklist, and start in toward the treasure... and the DM tells them to roll initiative, they never asked if there was a monster on the pile of treasure fnar fnar fnar and the ancient Red Dragon is attacking.

When we RP, we make choices. Choices need to be based on information from scene-runners and RP partners. If I'm playing a character in a committed relationship and they're cheating on their partner, it's incumbent on me to relay the relevant information to my RP partners that their character would have.

@deadculture (It's a joke because I am a William IRL)

Tobias 100% of the time makes me think of the animorph.

@deadculture said in ITT: Names You Always See:

William

Nothing wrong with the name.

"House" is a play on "Holmes" being a homophone of "homes."

god dammit

@bored said in How can everyone play the same game?:

Arx has many such knots of players, and while some might do screwy things, many do valid things that nonetheless will never affect the big picture metaplot outside their family/clique/etc. Presumably you do not discount that as 'not playing.'

Arx has several knots of players. In my experience, most of these knots interact with other knots, intersecting other knots, and so on. Which gets you to a sort of... widespread... collective... thing.

And I wasn't saying that two PCs who play exclusively with each other aren't playing. I was wondering if they can be said to be playing the same game. If we're going to be calling the overall collective collaborative fictional space the 'game' (wank wank wank wank wank).

@bored said in How can everyone play the same game?:

The other issue is the 'getting people to play the same way' problem (I think 'play the same game' is terrible phrasing- so long as you're logged in, using the game resources, and adhering to policy, you are absolutely playing the same game).

That's an... interesting question, although I think it's getting more into terminology than epistemology.

If there are two PCs who log onto the game, interact with no one but each other, are they playing the same game as everyone else?

What if they're doing things in their one-on-one RP that wouldn't pass staff's definition of theme, but nobody but the two of them ever know about it?

An exaggeration, but not by much, of some PCs I've seen on some games. I understand that Arx had issues with a certain knot of Thrax players who actually tried to limit how much staff learned about what they were doing, to keep theme policing from cracking down on some of their stuff.

We are--to wank philosophic about pretending to be a sexy vampire--trying to create a shared fictional space for us to participate in this collaborative fiction... improv... thing, If we don't have some shared baseline assumptions, we're not really engaging each other.

So my gut feeling is that, even if "no" isn't a default answer, it should be one staff is ready to give.

A game can & often should have a lot of things going on. You can have action, TS, horror, TS, personal plot, TS, mystery, and TS comfortably on the same game. It's fine if a given player is only interested in some subset of the whole deal. But it needs to feel like it could all be taking place in the same... work? Reference frame?

Anything collaborative is going to have some give and take as a core part of the experience. But that's why staff should be giving some boundaries for people to play in, as I see it. If I want to play a given MU*, presumably it's because I like the theme behind it. If staff doesn't put their foot down every now and then, it's... likely the theme will become unrecognizable fairly soon.

So, say, if I were making... iunno, a Wild West game in a frontier town. It's true that samurai were a contemporary thing for the period. A samurai who wound up halfway across the planet could even be a cool PC. But if half the players apped in samurai, at some point I feel like I'm barely running a Wild West game anymore.