Posts made by Sunny

http://musoapbox.net/category/19/politics

Can we please take politics discussion to the politics board? There's a place for it. Thanks!

@auspice Yeah, can do the same on both Arx and M1963, too. Choose the colors and so on. It is one of my favorite new options people make available.

OH OH OH OH OH OH OH.

EMIT LABEL IS THE BEST THING EVER.

It puts [name] at the beginning of an emit for who did it.

I looooove:

Code that always highlights/colors my name, server side.
Code that highlights/colors speech a different color omg so amazing.
Poseorder code to see where I am
Code that lets me read my alts' @mail.
M1963's activity requirement notification code
Also weather code even though people mostly don't do it any more I like it when games are snowing.

@mietze Woaaaaaaaaaaaah. Good to know.

@seraphim73

Yep. I agree that there was racism. At no point did I suggest such was not the case.

@seraphim73 said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

@sunny said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

Now, if it was a Wild Wild West movie game (see: Will Smith), I would not expect there to be a problem with wanting to opt-out of the racism stuff. Cos that's not the point of it (we have giant spider robots, ffs, we are not going for historical accuracy).

Interestingly enough, there was a good deal of racism in the Wild Wild West movie. Heck, they nearly lynched the black main character.

So you think the racism was the point of the movie? Pretty sure I did not say that movie had no racism. It clearly had it. It would've been a bad example if it didn't. I said it would be reasonable for people to opt-out of that type of RP in this setting because it's not the point.

ETA: To clarify, re-enactment isn't the point.

Imma try to bring this up another way.

Many of these historical games are set in time periods where there's no indoor plumbing, rampant disease, people not bathing, water and food that could possibly kill you, no reliable birth control, women dying in childbirth all over the place, etc.. The world during these time periods was not actually enjoyable or fun. A lot of these things tend to be glossed over for historical settings, realism be damned, because this part isn't fun for anybody playing in it.

Racism isn't fun for the people that have to live with it.
Homophobia isn't fun for the people who have to live with it.

So yes, it is completely valid for him to ask 'Why is it important to you to have your character call my character a faggot?'

I am not suggesting that these things are things that nobody should be allowed to explore, that we should cut them out of our games, that anybody is bad or wrong for making a bigot PC. I do not in any way think this is true. I do think it's a valid question to ask. I do think it's something staff on these games should be clearer about.

ETA: Is it really that big of an OOC ask for you (generic) to not use that particular word in reference to my PC?

Here's the deal.

I work somewhere where folks have to deal RL with racism and the resultant discrimination on a constant, all the time basis. It impacts everything from buying homes to owning businesses. It is terrible and heartbreaking on a daily, consistent basis. I don't want to deal with this theme in my pretendy fun time. I deal with it as a 'theme' in my professional and personal life already. I don't get to turn it off. I don't get to walk away from it.

It's not fun. It's not enjoyable to explore. It's not enlightening, either.

I don't object in any way to, for an example, someone including this theme as part of their Wild West game. I wouldn't play it, because it's on the tin that this sort of thing is very likely to be included (cos realism is more important than somebody's delicate feefees, yes, I have accepted this).

Now, if it was a Wild Wild West movie game (see: Will Smith), I would not expect there to be a problem with wanting to opt-out of the racism stuff. Cos that's not the point of it (we have giant spider robots, ffs, we are not going for historical accuracy).

@faraday said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

@sunny said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

One of these things is not like the other, can you tell which one it is?

I guess I missed the part of the discussion where asking about a historical example equated to limiting the conversation only to historical examples and "moving goalposts"? But thanks so much for clearing that up for me.

He was given an example; he provided how he'd deal with it. He acknowledged that it didn't apply to historical examples. That's the problem going on, here. The question at hand includes X, it is not limited to X. His answer is a reasonable one for the example in most cases. Telling him his answer is incorrect because it does not apply to X is moving the goal post, as the original question included but was not limited to X. If the only solution worth discussing is one that applies to every single aspect of every single possible conflict, then there's no discussion to have at all, because one size does not fit all.

@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

Yes, it's of limited use in historic settings

limiting this discussion to hypothetical historical games

@faraday said

specifically included them

One of these things is not like the other, can you tell which one it is?

@arkandel said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

@sunny said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

@arkandel

Good luck. It's hard to have a discussion when one of the perspectives involved is continually grossly misinterpreted because people are threatened by the very EXISTENCE of an opposing viewpoint.

That's one of the benefits of having the discussion. If we never do then the perspectives are never challenged, and we can only get so far from an echoing chamber of talking to people who already agree with our viewpoints 100%.

I disagree. The point of having a discussion is absolutely to examine differing viewpoints and the like, but complete misrepresentation of a point makes it impossible to actually talk. If I say 'I like it when it's warm' and someone responds to it with 'well, I think sunsets and sunrises are just as pretty as a summer blue sky', that's not a discussion.

@arkandel

Good luck. It's hard to have a discussion when one of the perspectives involved is continually grossly misinterpreted because people are threatened by the very EXISTENCE of an opposing viewpoint.

@bored If there are other games that are doing the same thing presently, cool (also which ones I would like to look at them!). I was objecting to the statement that they were all over the place, that all period games were doing this, that people who want to roleplay this sort of thing are left out in the cold. I can think of 3 period games off the top of my head that are presently active, and 2 out of the 3 do NOT have these rules. The claim was that there was a seismic shift in the hobby.

This is the point, here, that was the original bone of contention:

Games set in crappy/oppressive worlds have flourished before, but it seems like there was some seismic shift over the last few years where everyone got worried they'd be labeled some sort of '-ist' and now everything's sanitized and pretty boring. People don't seem to leap to OOC accusations of the player behind a character being a murderer when that character kills a bunch of people, and I'm confused why we seem to have decided that's self-evident but a character being a sexist or a racist is legitimate cause for OOC concern.

There is one game that's 'sanitized and boring' by these metrics. One. And the response to that is a resounding 'ffs, it's one game, it's not the end of the world if some of us want to not play in the -ism environments when there are actually plenty of games that fit the wanted criteria'. And then there was all this lovely misrepresentation and hollering because how dare we, I guess.

@sunny said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

"I don't want to deal with this in my fun time" =/= "Nobody anywhere ever should have to deal with this in their fun time."

@faraday

@Roz and @Collective have answered your question, and made my point quite well. This is what I am talking about when I am referring to the misrepresentation of the point being made.

@faraday It's really difficult to have a discussion when any point made that's not part of the dominant narrative is completely mischaracterized and misrepresented when it's being responded to. I'm not sure how you think you're going to get a good discussion out of this sort of behavior. Sure, people have said it before. @Collective and I are surely not saying it now, but it's sure being addressed like we are. I disagree that there's been some sort of seismic shift in the community. I disagree that anybody here and now is suggesting that folks are bad people.

Why are we addressing 'bad people' when there's an actual issue that's actually happening to talk about?

@collective said in How should IC discrimination be handled?:

@sunny But ... but ... immersion!

Look, if a guy playing a werewolf from a family of reality bending mages who are tied to a small town that happens to be the epicenter for global cthuloid madness can't have his character call somebody the N-word while ripping a hole between the real world and a spirit realm so they can go chase rogue ghosts, well, that's just not realistic.

Pfft. The n-word is fine to ban, I don't care, he just better be able to call some woman a whore.

Like, the question I was initially answering was 'why are there so many games where IC -isms aren't allowed' and maybe I just don't know of them, but I can actually only think of one singular game in which this sort of RP was baked into the setting itself as off limits. The other period games I know of absolutely take them into consideration (afaik, @Auspice's game includes -isms, for example, and I am sure that M1963 has -isms).

So this is literally a complaint about one single game putting as off limits a sort of RP that some of us don't want to deal with (represented as ALL THE GAMES EVER), and it becomes a BFD. There's no value judgment here, there's no calling of names of people who like to play that sort of thing, there's just 'unrealistic' being leveled at the lack of inclusion of these things, there's misrepresentation of the point as a straw man, there's all sorts of other nonsense.

It is really, really, really okay if there's a game or two out there for those folks that don't want to deal with this stuff in their pretendy fun times. None of us are insisting that all games need to be this way, or even most. But a couple of games doing things this way is not 'some seismic shift' nor is it a problem in the community that needs to be addressed. @Arkandel's question is a good one, but I was addressing a specific statement, not making any of the points that are being attributed.