Posts made by Rook

Nothing saying that this system has to be public. Could be ST_Only or by using a /show command to another player. That's explicit consent.

You know, this sounds very much like the +kinks system from Shangrila, only adapted simply to list triggers/themes/squicks and whatever-else-have-you that you want called out. It could be easily adapted, code-wise, if someone had something like this lying around. It's essentially a managed list with comments.

I mean, seriously. The functionality is there, a display screen, a like/dislike command, a comment field.

I mean no disrespect to anyone, and I mean that honestly... but why would anyone who has triggers to any of the common/possible thematic elements of a game play on such a game, regularly? At an extreme, it could remind of Ganymede's (I think) rant about cigarette smoking areas and non-smokers.

I totally get that those with these triggers have every 'right' to be on said game. Not arguing that, but.. if it were me? I'd have warning stickers on me. For self-protection?

With people's love for fucking #hashtags, I cannot believe that this idea has not made it into the MU* world in a profitable and positive manner. WTF? This is a perfect application.

+event Mouse Races
Saturday night, the Rose Committee will be holding a charity event to further community understanding of Sunburn Awareness. At this event, there will be speakers, open bar, dinner options and several side attractions including a ring toss, mouse races, apple bobbing and a dunk tank. Bring your dollars to support!

Rating: R (Violence, Sexual Content)
Tags: #Vampire #Werewolf #VictimChosenFromCrowd #Mutiliation #MouseRacing

This could be a thing.

Also: FuckYerHashtag.

@surreality said in Emotional separation from fictional content:

saw her badgering behavior so it wasn't just a he said/she said sort of thing), after which, inevitably, she'd go on at length OOC about how disgusting they were that they had done so, even if it was only to get her to shut up and stop badgering them to do it.

Well, this makes me think of the player types that are attracted to the "dirtyness" of the content and the degrading, humiliating feelings that come from just imagining whatever acts. They like to talk about it, comiserate with others about how dirty and wrong it was. They like to highlight it's degrading and grossness in poses, emphasizing how humiliating it is. It's like a form of Dirty Talking or something.

I knew a guy once that was all about talking about how slutty this girl we knew (we were in high school) was. You know the type. He would sit and scoff and make shit up about her, in degrading and rude ways. Of course, you realize after a while that he wasn't disgusted by her, he had a huge crush. This kind of reminds me of that style of 'kink' or whatever. I am sure someone smarter can give a name to this.

I think that sometimes people like to dance along the lines of triggers for themselves. It's a danger play sort of attraction, or sometimes an attempt to heal from an earlier thing, and sometimes hapless RP partners get caught in the explosion.

^^^ Exactly.

Adult-rated games have adult-rated themes and events and RP.

If you cannot deal with a subset of those themes, it is on you to advertise somewhere, in explicit language, what you cannot, will not RP or be involved in. On a game where dark, horror like themes are the norm - maybe you should have a few notes on what your triggers are. On a teen-rated game, one wouldn't expect the 'norm' of RP to include butchery, rape, soul-ripping, whatever, (such RP may be explicitly against TOS/Policies, too) so it should stand to reason that people shouldn't have to have notices about those things.

The onus is on you for 50% of this.
The rest of the onus is on those that run scenes, scene with you, for the other 50%.

Oh and while I'm at it: waiving your rights by explicitly asking for a scene with someone should also waive your rights for complaint after the fact, if the scene generally went in the direction you asked for. Complaining after the scene should get YOU disciplined, not the person that you talked into your requested scene. That's some for of bullshit entrapment, and should rank right up there with falsifying logs to 'prove' someone was cheating in combat scenes.

@surreality
Oh hey now. I didn't say that I thought it was right or correct or should be allowed! I am 100% agreement with you. It pisses me off that you cannot have a positive impact in these types of situations. Personally, I have an addon in my browsers that removes all comments from any YouTube page, and it is precisely because of bigotry and racism that it is one of the first things in a new Chrome install.

The problem I have with today's issues is that social media and media attention on them is not helping the issue/conversation in any way. It is exacerbating the problem. Thus, it is not contributing in a positive way. I personally am much more impacted by movies of the plight of others than I am rants on Facebook, as an example. I react so much more logically, am loads more likely to shift my perspective, when presented with a calm, fact-based presentation about whatever it is you want me to care about. I know, I'm weird.

Eh, I dunno. I think that the "racism" that you refer to is coming from a very, very miniscule segment of hateful people (which isn't a society issue, it is a personal issue, the types I'm thinking of). I mean, come on, I think people love stirring the shit in an anonymous format. The old adage is true, that the keyboard makes people invulnerable. These people, I am willing to bet, are not at all like that "in real life" and around a real crowd of people.

I saw you log out yesterday.

Checking it out

Fuck I miss Canada.

Are you saying Canadians are drunks, @SG?

Just for the record, Your Honor, I did not say those things. Someone Else did.

@ThatGuyThere said in State of Things:

Except it kinda does bold means heavy emphasis, so while not exactly the text equivalent of yelling it would be at least the equivalent of raising ones voice.

I thought that ALL CAPS was yelling? I think bold is just meant to draw the eye to a key phrase in what someone is trying to get across.

Long-time RPer, first time caller... wanted to say that I love the show.

I'm looking for a game. Now, before you all chime in, wait for it... there's stipulations.

1. I don't know nWoD at all, but can learn. Slowly. I haven't played WoD for over a decade.
2. I play during US daytimes, so while I can RP slowly, I cannot play at night/weekend timeslots, so I need a game that has activity during the days.
3. Genres I would like*: Adult level fantasy (original or not), modern horror, sci-fi (non-Transformers, non-Star Wars).
4. I would love to have at least a contact to RP with, chat with, hang out with. Even better is a tie-in for characters/groups.

and GO!

• Afterthought: Genres I do not have interest in: Lords and Ladies games, My Little Pony, Tranformers, or anything based on a "kid's show".

@Arkandel said in State of Things:

Is the 'blue code' a real thing in your opinion? Do cops back illegal actions taken by their peers to the point of committing perjury or hiding/modifying evidence?

I want to point something out here. This 'code' that is being asked about is not just a 'blue' code, as @Derp says. There is a 'white' code (for doctors backing each other up on bad calls so that colleagues don't get sued), there is an 'IT' code that I've seen over and over and over, not just in one organization, but almost every one that I've worked directly with. Many of which are Fortune 100 companies. I know for a fact that there is a code amongst Accounting/Finance teams, Management and HR teams, the list goes on.

People instinctively circle the wagons around a comrade that they feel is going to be unjustly prosecuted for a "small thing", but the problem is that, over time, these wagon-circling parties start grating on the sense of right and wrong. Those involved start justifying two things: 1) that they have to defend themselves to do their jobs right, 2) the other people are just 'out to get them'. Right or wrong, just look around and you'll see proof of this where you work, where you go to school. Fuck, it's a core trope in TV Dramas.

Over large spans of time, a person's morals change, out of group and personal preservation. Not initially out of a sense of 'fuck them', but there is a lot of that in there.

I have come to this one conclusion about racism (from this one angle) from knowing a lot of police. Police officers of both sexes, of at least six races, and all of the ones that I'm thinking of are very against the habitual criminals. I don't call them racist, because these same individuals respect upstanding citizens, they segment them differently than they do the criminal element, the ones that they've booked and jailed time and time again. That is something that compounds the problem is personal experience with some of the perpetrators of the crimes that they are investigating and/or called to. Each one of these racially diverse cops uses the 'N' word, and what might surprise you is that it isn't just against the black segment of their 'clientele'. The word (at least amongst that very small segment that I know) is applied to anyone who is (heavily simplified) hell-bent on a life of crime because they don't want to pursue any other life.

Is it right? No. Is it real? Yes. At least in my visible sliver of the 'world'.

I think of things this way... In any given group, you will have a spectrum of 'heat', if you will. Indulge me in the mind exercise.

In a church, to use a wide-spread example, you have those that drink on Friday and Saturday night and come to church on Sunday and basically put in their time. Let's call them the 'blue', or cool side of the heat spectrum. Then you also have those that pray fervently every day, observe every religious rule that they know of, and generally frown on and avoid vices. This is the 'red', or hot side, of this group's "heat spectrum" that I picture.

You see this in every group where sub-groups are probable. High school class. Large groups of friends. Work offices.

Here's what I see as the real danger -- media (traditional news, social, anything with a large audience) tends to gravitate toward the 'louder voices'. Violence gets the airtime, be it physical or verbal. You hear about personalities posting Tweets that start a flamewar that no one not subscribed to those personalities would know about if it weren't for media calling attention to it.

It is the adult, modern equivalent of the class bully being watched by the entire school beating up a smaller/younger/underdog kid. The vast majority stand around and just watch. But a few egg that bully on. Bad Things happen.

Apply that mentality to the world hotspot issues right now, and you see where it could theoretically go.

I just think that @Ghost was speaking of natural self-preservation/self-advancement instinct, @Ganymede ? At least, that is how I read it. I think that it is true that it is ingrained in all of us to compete, sure, but as Gany points out... not at the expense of others, not to that degree, no.

@Ghost said in State of Things:
2) Black Lives Matter. It took me a long time to understand why the response of "All Lives Matter" to this movement pissed off so many people. It's not that all lives don't matter, it's that Black Lives Matter was the part of the discussion that they wanted to have; having someone tell you that you're being selfish when your attempt is benevolent is pretty sucky, and so the movement felt undermined and manipulated. I don't blame them.

From my perspective (someone who avoids watching either 'wing' of the news, and social media), things turned bad when the media took off with the movement's message without explaining it in a concise manner that was easily consumed. People who didn't know what the core of the message was and how it was meant to be made simply took it as an egotistical "We are worth more than you" statement, which was NOT what was meant.

It ballooned from there, and no real media outlet wanted to do anything but fan the flames because they were getting viewers, which meant more advertising interest...

I have to agree here (again, fuck) with @Thenomain. I've said, for a long time, that I thought that a civil war was coming to America... and it seems that no matter what happens, it is getting closer and closer to that. We see traditional, unbiased news reporting gone (to mirror what @Lotherio says about 'Newsroom', where that monologue starts the series), and the likes of Rather, Brokaw, Jennings, and other greats simply replaced by the likes of Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Thom Hartmann, and a slew of others that have sold their show out for advertising dollars. So the news outlets are pushing agendas now, is my point, and not unbiased, fact-based and fact-checked news.

Social media is deciding fates of lives before the courts are. It used to take weeks and weeks are newspaper stories for the public to form opinions, now it takes less than an hour as Like and Share start wildfires of opinionated, incompletely-informed pieces across the twitscape.

It's scary. I think it's pushing (at least America), blindly, toward confrontations. We already see rioting, protests, hate actions.