Posts made by Pandora

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

Then she didn’t say it. And if she says otherwise, that is false. And that is a lie.

A lie is not fraud. A lie is a lie.

This is how conversations between lawyers unfold.

Her: Are you saying I’m a liar?
Me: Yes.

Direct questions require direct answers.

Another fucking paper cut.

Triggered. My mother used to do this when I lived with her. She'd do something wrong, forget something, lose something, etc. and then instead of figuring it out, she'd blame me or my sister, screaming at the top of her lungs, getting in our faces asking if we're calling her a liar as if daring us to say yes so she'd have an excuse to resort to physical violence. It sucked, and I've inherited her rage which is one of my biggest real world disappointments/peeves. But at least I don't suffer from the urge to blame everyone for everything, so there's that!

@Kanye-Qwest said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

i have a cold sore.

My sister swears by topical Lysene for the sore and vodka for the nerve pain.

@Roz Got it, that makes much more sense.

@Wizz said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

Their vassals can't hold lands in the mainland Lyceum and the Saffron Chain, it's one or the other, so those specific vassals on the mainland are going to be in a very tight spot when it comes reassessment time. Give up everything and start from scratch, or stay with Velenosa and their traditional holdings.

From Pax's first post:

Now, if some house wants to go with Pravus and Velenosa (or any other fealty) /chooses/ to
give up territory to this new fealty for whatever reason, fine, but staff is certainly not saying
they have to; in this case, all the power is with the existing fealty.

Just for future reference, because at some point I imagine there will be more exploring & more land discovered for the taking: Pax has said here that it actually is possible to hold land on the mainland and in the new islands, with the agreement of the existing fealty, no?

@Wizz said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

Their vassals can't hold lands in the mainland Lyceum and the Saffron Chain, it's one or the other, so those specific vassals on the mainland are going to be in a very tight spot when it comes reassessment time. Give up everything and start from scratch, or stay with Velenosa and their traditional holdings.

Emphasis mine, is this in relation to Pravus' current vassals?

@Roz said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

Staff bbpost. All of Pravus’s vassals are off the mainland, so if any mainland Lyceum houses wanted to become a Pravus vassal, they’d have to get permission from their liege to be released from their oaths of fealty, and then they’d still have to give up their mainland holding and go stake out new land on the Saffron Chain.

Emphasis mine, is this in relation to Houses that are already Pravus vassals, or houses that are under the Velenosa that might want to jump ship to go become Pravus vassals?

@Wizz said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

Their vassals can't hold lands in the mainland Lyceum and the Saffron Chain, it's one or the other

Source?

@AeriaNyx said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

@Pandora If there's no OOC communication, sure. But if people can be communicative OOCly about stuff, then there shouldn't be a problem.

If I've taken all the IC steps needed to accomplish a goal and you step in my way OOCly talmbout 'Hey, wouldn't it be cool if I stymied your progress with a series of IC hoops for you to jump through while I attempt to steal your vassals from under you to keep you from progressing?' I'm more likely to report you to staff for harassment than anything else.

@AeriaNyx said in Arx's Elevation Situation:

Or, like, make them jump through hoops to buy time to court their vassals, be they PC or NPC houses.

Lol, plz no. This is how you make people hate you.

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

Peeve:

Opposing counsel who leave confidential information in their produced documents.

Oh, sure, that seems like an advantage, but it isn't. It leaves me with two choices: (1) giving the stuff back and being called a wuss by my client; or (2) refusing to point out the error and being called an asshole by opposing counsel.

If people did their fucking jobs, this wouldn't be a moral dilemma.

I've always liked to hope, in these scenarios, that the 'mistake' might be the opposing counsel trying to ensure a morally-sound outcome when their client is glaringly in the wrong. It's a stupid optimism, I know.

OOC raging assholes are pretty much never a good thing. Please, all raging assholes avoid any MUDs I am associated with, we do not need or want you. Quiet Storm Assholes and below, please.

The point has been made, people for whom different measures could be beneficial have spoken, people have criticized the point and the measures suggested, people have made suggestions & one game has even made what I'd consider a positive amendment to their existing policy after consideration of the conversation in this thread. People have engaged with what I'd consider almost universal good faith, whether in favor of or against the ideas brought forth, and that's always cool to see.

Code like this can't exist in a vacuum and so I don't expect any game to plug-n-play the idea without first considering their game culture, existing measures, and whether it's worth it time/effort-wise for them. If the thread has at least made people take a moment to consider what more can be done to help players defend their boundaries in text-based games, it's a win for me & we don't have to beat the horse to death trying to come to a community-wide consensus - there isn't one, and that's okay.

@Apos Preach. Problem players love to create dependency in new players, with their 'Let me show you the ropes' spiel; it's a form of grooming for sure. Problem is, many perfectly well-meaning players have the same behavior and we encourage this behavior in newbie-helpers, so it's hard for new players to tell who is being welcoming and friendly, and who is seeking to use and abuse them.

If thou art comfortable using OOC Whatever then by all means please do so. This thread is not about those of you/us for whom this is already working. This thread is for the people for whom the current system is not working.

Once upon a time, the NYC metro lines (back then called the subway) were all in greyscale on a white background. This worked fine for almost everyone. The maps are now color coded with icons and it's the same damn map but many people are like OH, this is MUCH EASIER to navigate, yay!

This is the new subway. The redcard/metrocard of OOC barriers. The 'this isn't really anything new, but someone out there lost, confused, and anxious might find it just a tiny bit friendlier to use' and if you don't really care about this hobby being a little more friendly that's fine, but don't act like your opinion is the only one that matters.

This is in the mildly constructive thread for a reason; if you don't have anything mildly constructive to add ('Fuck this idea, fuck this discussion, I'm out and you should be out too!' is not constructive, useful, polite, positive, affirmative, or any other positive word other than adamant) then please kindly see yourself out. No one here is obligated to like any idea posted here, the point is to come up with ideas and see what might help. No coded tool will be a 100% effective solution, the same way no policy has ever been a 100% effective solution, but damn if I'm not heartened to see people trying to bridge the gap. I might not be the friendliest or most sober member of this community, but I do appreciate you people, or I wouldn't be here.

@Kestrel said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

There's a MUD called After Earth which has a "graphic" command which I think is a pretty neat idea:

Graphic is used to indicate that you are uncomfortable with the content of the RP, either due to its violent nature, sexual content, or some other reason which would justify omitting, editing, or otherwise toning the RP down to a more acceptable level.

When this command is used, all persons in the room should comply and reduce the level of detail. It should not require clarification or lapse into OOC discussion.

See also: MUDSEX, TURNS

Mudsex (TS) is also never supposed to occur without use of a "consent" command.

Helpfile for Consent

Syntax: consent list
consent give <name> [note]
consent revoke <name> [note]
consent alert <name> <reason>
consent check <name>
consent request <name> [reason]

All players are required to seek and obtain consent prior to engaging in sexually explicit roleplay.

The consent list command lists all characters that your character has provided consent to. Consent give <name> will add a character to the list, with an optional note if desired. Consent revoke <name> will remove consent at any time, also with an optional note.

All players are required to confirm that they have received consent before pursuing sexual intercourse using the consent check <name> command. Likewise, a player can OOCly declare their character's IC intentions with consent request <name> with an optional reason.

The consent system is PRIVATE. It does not report to staff unless a player uses the consent alert <name> <reason> command to tell staff that something is wrong.

At first glance I really like this idea, but a few concerns come to mind. First and foremost, at what point is one supposed to use the consent command? How far can RP go without the command being used? Kissing? Cuddling? Intimate non-penetrative touching? Let's say the RP has gotten that far, and although both characters seem into it, one of them has not provided consent or responded to the consent request command. Does that mean the scene should end? What if they didn't see it or don't know how the system works? Should you OOCly bring it up?

That brings us to another can of worms I see, which is people OOCly pressuring others to use the consent command. The helpfile doesn't seem to make any mention of whether or not it is against policy to OOCly pressure/cajole/convince anyone to give consent; as we all hopefully know, consent given under pressure isn't true consent.

Another issue is one that probably shouldn't be an issue, but if you've ever been in a game Discord with more than your immediate circle of friends, you've probably witnessed something of the sort: If Susie and Katie are RPing and flirting and having a good time and seem to mesh well and Katie activates consent before Susie and then Susie jokes to her Discord chat "Ha, I'm so awesome Katie gave me consent already and we're only having a drink in the bar." & then this triggers a wave of 'Katie is a slut' and 'Katie gave me consent her first day on the grid' and 'Katie is a mesbian all they want is TS' - you know, the usual slut-shaming, except now with coded 'proof' that player-of-Katie is DTF.

I don't mean to be a pessimist, I just know some of the people I unfortunately roleplay adjacent to; considering the downsides to everything is just a result to that.

@Kestrel Understandable. I just know Arx has a history of giving people more than enough rope to hang themselves before an actual ban comes down. I'm sure if your friend feels things happened unfairly they could try to talk it out; especially if it was some sort of one-time-only misunderstanding, things happen.

@Kestrel said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

A while ago a friend told me they got banned on Arx for sexist behaviour.

Eye twitching.

Did they mention how many times they got banned?

I sincerely apologize if at any point it seemed as if I jumped on @faraday as that was never my intention, I certainly didn't post anything to undermine coded efforts at more reliable logging on the types of games many of you play.

That said, downplaying the experiences of people who've found themselves in these situations as trivial is unfortunate, especially when the conversation has largely been about using new/necro'd code to facilitate a structured, easy to navigate system currently lacking in many instances. Game culture in the past, as @surreality mentioned, has never been as woke as it is now, and options back then unsupported by today's awareness, accountability, and follow-through from staff are all possible options that I'd love to see implemented and experimented with.

@Ganymede Of course it bears keeping in mind that oftentimes it'll be someone in no position to be making threats that's hitting the abort mission button.