@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
So, we are at loggerheads. I saw a fantastic show. I think this is what is so very lovely about musical theatre, personally.
Seeing yourself in art, and finding that personal connection in a theatrical piece, is really the most important part in the end. I have plenty of plays and musicals that I think "this is not the best show around, but it hit me DEEP and nothing will change that fact."
@nemesis said in What's your identity worth to you?:
5: I've always held the opinion that anyone who wants or needs to hide who their alts are is up to no good. Whenever I have a wizbit or access to the shell, I will also siteban or lock out via iptables any IP Address which turns out to belong to a relay/proxy agency for the same reason.
How do you feel about players who keep their alts private due to being stalked?
@derp said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I expect my critics to tell me something more than what I can see for myself. Just like a teacher or professor, I want their piece to be more than an opinion. I want it to be an educated opinion.
But, like... isn't that what they kind of do now?
Ok, so, for example -- you, based on background, think that this play is more meritorious than some critics do. But they also don't share the background.
We all do this from time to time, and time can change those opinions.
I loved Brokeback Mountain when it came out. I thought it had an important message. I still do. And I was pissed when critics canned it.
??? It has an 87% on RT, that's not really canned.
@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
@lithium said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
The problem with critics, is the fuck they know what /I/ like. They are presenting an opinion piece, that's it, their opinion is not any more valid than mine or anyone else's.
But it really should be.
I expect my critics to tell me something more than what I can see for myself. Just like a teacher or professor, I want their piece to be more than an opinion. I want it to be an educated opinion.
Yeah, 100% agree here. And really, being a major theatrical critic used to mean this. A higher level of education about the artform. That's unfortunately changed over the years.
@ixokai said in A Game of Thrones MUX Discussion:
No. Its not. You don't have to defend your copyright or you lose it. And I still don't think any real lawyers are telling authors that they must say no.
I imagine there are plenty of lawyers who are like "you should say no just so we can all avoid the potential for a possible headache down the line."
@aria Parks & Rec and The Good Place are the first that comes to mind for upswings. Yuri on Ice!
Finally finished Sense8 tonight. There was something so heart-wrenching about -- I don't know how to say it, the optimism of it? Not naivite, but the overwhelming sense of all these different, disparate people, all broken in their own places, reaching out to help each other. I AM VERY OVERWHELMED WITH FEELINGS.
@apos said in What is your turning point?:
@packrat said in What is your turning point?:
Weirdly I have a kind of hard mental cut off for scheduling RP, outside of specific events. If somebody say asks if I will be free 7pm on Tuesday to RP?
The internal response is almost immediately a kind of mental FUCK NO! NEVER!
Even if I was originally probably planning to be around and RPing at that time.
I dunno why, but as soon as RP is hard scheduled with a date and time I just don't enjoy it. It carries a feeling of obligation, and it's no longer fun. I'll do it for people because some people can't RP otherwise and need me to help move their stories along, but I just think of it as work. I'm glad they enjoy it, but I often am so dialed out that when people talk up about how they loved the RP I have no idea what they are talking about since I don't remember the scene at all. It was a job that was taken care of.
This really bums me out, because if I never scheduled things there would just be people I'd never RP with. Or maybe RP with after weeks or months of us pinging back and forth with "Hey you free?" Which just leaves me feeling anxious for weeks.
@goblin said in Tomorrow is the Deadline....:
The fact you have to register to do something that is your full right has me so entirely baffled. Why is it like that? (Honest question, no sarcasm here.)
It makes it easier to disenfranchise voters.
Just start FTB/FFing the TS to move onto something else. Don't have to have any sort of OOC convo about it, you just do it, move on ICly to something else. If they eventually ask OOC, just shrug and say you just feel like RPing other stuff.
Think of it this way: what if you just treat it as any other type/theme of RP that you can get tired of if you do to much of. We all kind of feel there has to be an inherent awkwardness surrounding TS, but what if it was just as casual as being like "all my RP lately has been combat-centric, just wanna do some other stuff"?
If you just start FFing most of the time and the TS is the most important thing to the other player, they'll probably just beat you to the punch re: IC breakup.
Ok, well, first of all you are wildly mischaracterizing what I put in that post, which is unsurprising, but alright.
I just reread the whole thing as a refresher of all of that and no, she really isn't. Your posts in that conversational thread were seriously messed up, especially because you really didn't -- and still don't -- understand why.
@jeshin said in @Arx: Anonymous Messengers:
Why did condemn get taken away? I vaguely remember it happening after Dawn said she arranged for people to pay the tiend even though all the Peerage picked one person per house to sacrifice or something. I could be totally wrong but that feels like the event that triggered some kind of condemn drama.
It happened around that time but that's not an accurate retelling of those particular events with Dawn. (The High Lords voted to pay the Teind in general, there were no decisions made about who would pay the Teind, other than I think Niccolo publicly volunteering himself or whatever. But Dawn had a group ready to go and promptly went once the High Lords voted for the Compact to pay it.)
Anyways yes anonymous messengers would be awful for the same reason condemn turned out to be awful. They'd just be another way to pile onto someone with no risk of IC reprisal.
@arkandel I do understand the general sentiment of "this isn't the Hog Pit" and can respect it, but I do feel a little uncomfortable that, like -- this is actually a number of posters talking about stuff that's personal, not political.
@thenomain said in @Arx: Anonymous Messengers (Answered):
@roz said in @Arx: Anonymous Messengers (Answered):
multiple posters have already talked about why it wasn't really a situation where staff could start taking people aside
That doesn't mean staff could do nothing more than remove the tool.
Which I said. And clarified. They reportedly chose not to do anything more. Their motives were made very clear, and my opinion changes none of that.
So let's please not get into the "you missed the point of x". It's a game not much better than "he-said/she-said". I saw the "point of x" and I am questioning it, disagreeing with one aspect of it.
You don't have to agree with my point, or even disagree with it for both our points to be valid.
No, I'm disagreeing with your framing of events because I think they're inaccurate. Specifically this:
@thenomain said in @Arx: Anonymous Messengers (Answered):
edit: Let me put it this way: If one-fifth of the game's active population all individually decided that Dawn needed condemned, then maybe it wasn't a dog-piling. Maybe it was a real, if visceral, opinion of the game's population.
Staff decided that it wasn't, that one-fifth of the game's population was hatin'. That's...a huge chunk of the game's population, on any size game, to decide are abusive. Without comment to them about their actions.
It's not important if it was a purposeful dog-pile or just a bunch of people having the same opinion: it's not a fun experience either way. Staff didn't actually say that they thought 1/5th of the game's population was being abusive. They've said that if people were being abusive, they would have talked to them. But it doesn't have to have been actively abusive for it to have caused issues. The system caused issues. And yeah, I think there were people among those condemn piles who were probably active assholes about the situation, but that's not actually the point that was being made. Yes, it could have been a real opinion of the game's population. That doesn't change the fact that it was really easy for people to just toss negativity without cost or risk and for other parties to have to bear the weight of tons of people doing that without thinking. The system was unfun. It can be accurate IC, the individuals in question can not be abusive haters, and it can still cause situations that are OOCly unpleasant.
To a few of the points being discussed:
***=Spoilers!***
Despite all of that, I actually really did enjoy the movie!!
@surreality Yeah, I mean, I will talk about the differing power of language, but I don't tend to use "dick" as an insult either these days, because I do think we're better off casting both to the wayside. In this recent case, the "but we've used the term 'dick' forever" is really just -- you know, no one was talking about that word? Was Seraphim defending his right to use it while also asking people not to use a word? Nah. I mean, if someone wants to be like "Can we not use 'dick' as an insult then, either" I'd be like, well okay. Like, joke's on you! I still count the removal of all gendered insults as a win.
ETA: I'm not actually sure which part you meant would surprise me, tho
As things come a close tomorrow, this Twitter thread has a collection of some of the most magnificent moments of this series. It's really nice to look back to see how many remarkable things they did manage to deliver, even if they're faltering at the end.
@quinn holy shit i wish i could upvote that more than once
@Arkandel Sophie Turner and Emilia Clarke. They've already made their ways into some major franchises and, frankly, they are young and beautiful in a very Hollywood-approved way. (That is not meant to insult their abilities as actresses, because I think they're both very talented: just acknowledging that success in Hollywood is UNFORTUNATELY not just about that. For instance, Maisie Williams is also great, but I could foresee her not quite finding big Hollywood success the same way because she doesn't FIT THE MOLD quite as well for a young actress.)
@seraphim73 It's probably not personal to you as much as -- plenty of RPers have had awkward experiences in regards to getting involved with a PC where there's a RL married couple in the mix. And it can make them shy away from that in the future.
