I have to go to work and face the people I called incredibly stupid and naive for thinking Trump had a snowball's chance in hell of winning. Including my boss. I literally feel sick. And I mean literally-literally, not figuratively-literally. I would cry but I'm still in shock. I live in a country that's so racist and awful that it elected Donald Trump. Where is @Cirno, I am @Cirno-levels of black-and-angry today.
@Ghost I'm glad you're a good person and not a pedophile, and I'm also glad you're not the person who decides the definition of pedophilia, or what people can or cannot write. I hope you're as fervent about protecting actual children, none of whom are harmed by 2 adults writing bad smut while pretending to be 2 adults wearing bio-engineered teenage skin suits.
Taking a younger friend to a Korean BBQ place for the first time and informing them that they have to pour my Soju with both hands and look away when I am drinking otherwise they'll be breaching ancient rites of Korean restaurant etiquette. I swear if you've never done this you've got to try it. Endlessly entertaining.
I could not care less about anyone's playlist, and I'm pretty sure I've never even skimmed the ones I've come across on people's wiki page, and I don't even notice them usually unless it's a site that allows people to auto-play their music, and even then it's just to immediately stop the song.
That said, share away, it's literally hurting no one.
Please never ask me to listen to anything though, I can't get those 2-5 minutes back so the answer will always be no, and I will resent you for making me crush your fleeting hope.
@Thenomain You should have just discreetly inquired around town about who did his cosmetic work.
I know MSB/Wora has a nasty history of kink-shaming people having their harmless fun on Shang, and that's cool and I'mma let y'all finish - but please do that shit in its own thread without derailing this one. It's called 'Firan Secrets', not 'lets poke fun at Shang character concepts yet again'.
RL anger: When I thank someone and their response is "NP." and my brain, after years of conditioning, reflexively thinks 'No thanks,' hearkening back to the days when NP stood for Noble Privilege and we all thought this was hilarious. It's 2018, I'm allowed to be angry this is still happening in my head, right?
TS is not some magical alternative RP that is bound by different rules of engagement than any other type of RP, and the sentiments that people express to that effect seem to be rooted in what I would consider the negative form of slut-shaming.
If for example someone didn't TS ever, but really enjoyed combat RP to the extent that they sought it out almost exclusively, hounded other combat-leaning characters to spar as soon as they logged in, abusively trash-talked people, IC or OOC, that didn't want to fight them, started whisper campaigns alleging people were twinks or cheaters any time they lost a fight, etc - all of these behaviors would be a sign of someone being pretty damn annoying with a higher-than-acceptable level of IC/OCC crossover.
But for some reason, we treat people with this level of crossover regarding TS as monsters, while people who crossover for other reasons (combat twinks, gold hoarders, power-grabbers, etc) as mere annoyances.
It's human nature to invest at least some measure of self into roleplay characters, and being 'into' the erotic smut you're writing between two characters isn't something to be ashamed of so long as you are not casting any aspersions or leveling any expectations on the other player, same as with any other type of interpersonal RP.
@Testament I'm not crying, my eyes are just sweaty. It'll be morning soon enough, and I'm here hoping it's something they can throw meds at, for both your sakes.
@farfalla said in TS - Danger zone:
@Pandora What is your point? I can't even tell what I'm supposed to be displeased by. Is your argument that... we shouldn't ban certain types of behavior on games, because some people want the facade of non-con RP but won't say so, so we'd better make sure they can get their heart racing unexpressed desires over the expressed desires of other people to not be explicitly pressured and creeped on? Or is it that because you can't entirely eliminate pressure or coercion or non-con behavior, we shouldn't try to disallow any of it? Or that we don't have the "right" (whatever that means) to establish content rules and guidelines on games?
I know you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, tbh, but it really seems like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
You're boring.
People that joyfully, proudly proclaim their disdain and loathing for all of mankind - while trying to be friends/curry favor with everyone. Don't rep that life if you aren't about that life, you might cut yourself on your own edginess.
I TS when the character I am playing experiences chemistry with another character that signifies adding a sexual component to their banter & interactions, as well as a concern for the happiness and well-being of another person, would be a positive and enriching layer to my roleplay.
I love TS, I've never played a character I wouldn't TS as.
But I also haven't TSed with anyone in years, because that chemistry is rare & I'm not interested in TSing anyone for clout, or to make someone else jealous, or because I'm bored, or because it'll get me attention or approval, or any of the other negative reasons I can think of that people TS. I'm definitely interested in reading what sorts of positive, roleplay-healthy reasons people have for TSing.
@Auspice Spoken as an older sister with a younger sister that flat-out had a better life than I did, but still complains more than anyone I know - little sisters are just shitty people. They mean well, but they're horrid.
@Ganymede said in Punishments in MU*:
And the second sounds like public shaming, which I am generally against.
Banning someone is a form of public shaming; just because they're off your game now and you don't have to look them in the metaphorical eye afterwards doesn't mean they haven't been shamed and that they aren't going to suffer negatively within the wider community as a result.
That said, public shaming is fitting for anyone that's done something egregious enough to warrant getting banned in the first place. Whether it's a ban or some other form of punishment, at the end of the day a game is a community and people deserve to know who and what the problems are. I'm not saying they need to be tarred and feathered, but a simple acknowledgement that X did Y & has been given a warning would stop the whisper-game in its tracks.
Imagine if <insert your favorite gaslighter here> wasn't able to do that shit to you or anyone else because people knew it'd happened before, had been informed, knew what signs to keep an eye on, and knew staff was not going to turn a blind eye to it?
It's so easy to make smols happy. I sent my nine-year-old to go brush teeth the before bed and got hit with a massive case of the sulks. I intercepted in the kitchen and pulled skewers and marshmallows from behind my back. We roasted a marshmallow each over the gas stove and danced around the kitchen. All smiles to go brush the sticky from the teeth afterward, and bedtime only delayed by 5 minutes to bring back the happy. So worth it.
Some games require staffers to build, others have systems in place where players can do their own builds. Some games require staff to run plots, others are PrP only. Some games require staff to approve character applications, others have a full chargen where staff input isn't required.
And so on.
It is therefore ineffective to bog down the definition of staff with specific tasks, as those then become game-specific definitions.
The job of staff as a whole in any text-based game is to maintain the code, theme, and community standards through all of the back-end tasks that players do not have access to, and these will vary greatly depending on if you run a MUD, RPI, MUX, MUSH, or MOO as each have different systems and requirements from staff.
This differs from players, in that their responsibility is to interact with the systems in place on the front end, ensuring that their contributions to the game are thematic and not to the detriment of anyone else attempting to play the game.
(Also players - See Below:)
Home sick and asking Alexa over and over again:
"What's black and white and red/read all over?"
Best answers so far:
"A honey badger in a fight with a tomato."
"A well-educated penguin."
"A panda in an Elmo costume."
@BlondeBot said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
While the end goal is laudable, I don't think this implementation would work at all. I think it's the kind of thing that can only be established by fostering a game culture of mutual respect and tolerance for people's boundaries.
It seems a slap in the face to game owners who are already sincerely trying their hardest to say 'you're obviously just not trying hard enough to foster a game culture of perfect mutual respect and tolerance & that's why it has not been achieved yet'. So I can't in good conscience agree it's better to do nothing than to try something.
I have a new pillow. It is a grey snek. The tail goes through the mouth and it basically donuts around the neck - while vibrating a soothing neck massage. It's perfect for people like me that sleep sitting up & sometimes find their head drooping to one side, as it keeps the head upright and shoulders relaxed.
@Testament said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
What worries me is that a system like this could be abused so that someone could make sure that nothing bad ever happened to their character ever.
There are already enough players who feel that any negative consequences to their actions on a game is infringing on what they believe they're comfortable with.
@Pandora said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
Hopefully this also addresses the 'no veto' concern as well; if RED is being used in a way the other party feels is unfair, they've of course got the recourse of taking this up with staff. There is no circumstance I can think of where it's better for a player to try and force another player into something than to let staff intervene.