Best posts made by Sunny

Just to throw this out there, because I should! I am in the process of making a character on the game, and a bunch of people I play with have been doing so as well, and Sups is reasonable, fun, and while I still disagree with some of his decisions they're consistent and they're reasonable -- there's multiple valid ways to interpret different things, and his is actively valid.

Game gets four out of four stars thus far. He's an active, intelligent, reasonable, and friendly staffer/game lead. He explains his decisions, he looks to make sure characters fit in just right, and is a good storyteller. So yeah, he is as reasonable as he presents himself here. If you're looking for an oWoD game, I have moved from neutral to 'it's a good game'.

My two cents.

@Derp said in Leadership, Spotlight, and PCs of Staffers:

It sounds to me like we, as a culture, just need to accept that staff are players too, and should enjoy all the benefits that other players do. Because they do a hard job, and deserve to at least have as much fun as any other player. Stop asking staffers to be selfless masochistic martyrs for your fun if you aren't willing to appreciate their need for the same.

I don't think that it's a cultural expectation that staff should be selfless, masochistic martyrs. @Ominous has said that she/he doesn't think that those staff (in those circumstances) should get the perks of being a player, but I don't believe anyone else is advocating such an extreme stance (or if they are, it's all blurred together, sorry). Hopefully folks are sensible enough to not be this ridiculously extreme about these issues. 'Playing in a scene that you're storytelling', rule wise, is (or at least should be) something that applies to both staff and players equally.

I find no fault, not even a little one, with the premise that staff should enjoy the same benefits/perks/etc. that players do. I firmly believe that this should be the case. I just also happen to believe that they should be held to the same standards and the same rules, and that the policies, rules, standards, etc should be developed with the thought that they should be applying to everyone involved equally. I do not think that anyone should get EXTRA perks for being staff, beyond those that are simply impossible to remove due to the human condition and things. I do also think that in some cases, a bit more oversight ought to be applied to staff where the rules/standards are concerned. Not different rules, just more supervision. Perhaps even stricter interpretation, where warranted. But not different rules. Not to their benefit, not to their detriment.

There are, of course, also rules that only apply to staff (because, say for example that your average player does not have the ability to look at someone else's sheet), but those are onlyappropriate (to me) in the cases where they don't apply to your general playerbase because they don't have the tools/access/need, rather than just because they're players. So rules that govern when you should +sheet someone would be appropriate; rules regarding what you can play (above and beyond the limits applied to the playerbase) would not be.

@silentsophia said:

Also, woop mage.

There it is.

On one hand, tits for a mount fucking drives me nuts. That some chicks use sex appeal instead of something else in any of my hobbies, because it perpetuates a big problem, right?

On the other hand, I think their ability to do so should be their choice. That they SHOULD totally be able to do it, and why the fuck should anyone judge them for it.

If we are going to be feminists (so to speak), we need to support the sex kittens just as much as the housewives just as much as the squarepants brigade.

@Insomnia

I am...wow. Just wow.

No. No, no, no. You are wrong, and the viewpoint you are spouting is wrong, and you should feel bad. I am not joking or being playful here: I hope you feel bad for saying these awful things about somebody.

Just because I get a salad at a burger place does not mean I get to be mad at the next burger place for not having them.

Just because I personally encourage someone to touch me has NO BEARING on that person touching someone else, welcome or otherwise.

The problem is with 'why not, other person did', not 'other person'. Do you blame sex workers for people being raped, too?

@evilcabbage You are wrong. That is not an appropriate use of quotes. It does not mean what you think it means. Go look it up.

@Misadventure said in Harassment in VR, there's something we can likely learn from this.:

And if you're wrong? You look at the ashes and shrug and walk away?

I'm not wrong.

If a person harasses somebody, it is not some other person's fault. Just because I let somebody touch me does not make me responsible for that person touching someone else WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. Period. I don't give a fuck if "feminist academic circles" debate the topic. They're stupid if they're actually debating this, too.

I realize this is a contentious and difficult as fuck topic, but realize that its been going on for decades in the feminist academic circles, and THEY haven't come to a decision either. So your righteous fury ... is yours to have. There is no consensus.

And?

So I'd say either being willing to explain carefully, and without attacking a person nor reducing their words to hyperbole, OR pointing to articles that sanely attempt the same, would be far more productive.

So? I do not owe you shit. I don't owe you shit when you PM me, and I don't owe you shit when you call me out on threads after you've said that you don't want to engage with me any more. I have absolutely no obligation to not be offensive in response to someone else being offensive, and she was being offensive. I don't actually need lessons in how to communicate with people.

Or you can be angry and destructive.

Or, you know, I can just be blunt and forthright and not bother candy coating shit just to avoid offending your delicate sensibilities.

Currently the recent thread is deceased. No minds were changed, no compelling thoughts were shared.

Did you not read @Ganymede's posts? Or @surreality's? Or @roz's? Or how about any of the others that were much more thoughtful than my own? Reasons were given. Information was shared. I said that I hoped that she felt bad. That's just awful, isn't it?

Asking if she blames sex workers for people being raped is a valid question within the context of her posts. Is it uncomfortable? Absolutely. Does that invalidate it? Nope. It's illustrating what she's saying in a much more obvious, much more black and white way.

I would almost say it's a difference between roleplay-intensive and roleplay-exclusive, almost. Like, intensive implies that there are still other things to do besides roleplay, there. That it's not absolute...which is accurate. Mushes do not fall under the category of RPI games. They aren't. They're RPE. If you aren't roleplaying, you are not doing anything that means playing at all.

@Arkandel said in Policies:

How do we feel about policies which punish players for their past behavior from different games?

As in, a new game opens and @Arkandel is already banned. Come on, you've all considered it.

In answer to the specific question, I have no qualms keeping the door closed where some people are concerned, and plan to communicate such very clearly. There are people that are not welcome for a variety of reasons. They will not ever be welcome. I have no interest in having them on my game any more than I would having them over to my house. That's not as much about their behavior on past games directly as it is that I feel it's my right not to have to deal with people on my game that I have had significant problems with in the past. Why would I subject myself to that bullshit? It's my space. Nobody is owed the opportunity to participate. Nobody is owed any part of my time.

@Three-Eyed-Crow said:

@Sunny said:

Yes, this is the Nymeria game, to save anyone else the time of going and looking.

This is another one of those times where I pine for the WORA archive, for a simple link to the insane history of Nymeria.

Bork bork bork.

@Thenomain

I agree 100%. It is an absolute must.

@Royal said:

Same with great role players. They're awesome! Surely they are waiting for a scene to start, so I shouldn't bother asking. When in reality? They're staring at the OOC room chatter.

This is so a thing.

Yeah. Forewarned is forearmed. I've personally never had issues with him on the games we've been on at the same time, but none of them were the places that went up in flames, either. Either his usual MO may not have worked, the conditions weren't right for him to destroy, or whatever? I don't know. I think with a reputation this extensive it's absolutely worth being mindful, but with my personal experience being in opposition to what a lot of folks say, and considering that many of the folks that say these things are folks I have had problems with...well. I'll be mindful, be aware -- as I always am, with this guy and a couple of other purported bad actors -- and that's that. I couldn't advocate tossing him off of a game, and honestly hope staff on Arx don't go there.

At the same time, there are many, many people who could say the above about Spider. I'm well aware of it, and it's why I lend the weight to this that I do rather than dismissing it out of hand.

(ETA: Then again, the games I have supposedly been on with him in the past, I am not 110% sure it was him and not one of the false flags, so that could also be the reason I didn't have problems with him. Because it wasn't him. ^^)

@kay

I have never played a character in a family like that ever and don't know if I could do it. (That is a joke for the people who know better.)

I've been poking a few places, but if I come up with something I think will work there, I'll let you know!

@WTFE

Did...you not read any of @Apos's posts? For serious? It seems like you didn't read any of his posts besides the one you quoted.

I think that you should do it and that there's a market for it! Even if it's not something I personally would enjoy, I know a lot of folks DO like that sort of game, and it would be great to have further variety on offer.

@WTFE

Okay, then. Your loss.

Edited to add: Also, no. It is not a fact. It is a bias on your part.

Kudos for trying something new! I'm happy to see Ares getting the use, too. I wish this project all the best.

@buttercup said in Coming Soon: Arx, After the Reckoning:

Well, shitballs.

Thrax and any non-tainted future it had just went to hell and that is entirely a shame.

Max = Custodius = Flee

I was loving the game, too.

My experience with the situation so far gives me complete faith that staff will handle any problems very promptly and appropriately. Idk about other games, but on Arx I do not believe that he will be an issue.