Posts made by Tinuviel

I can see the pros and cons for both approaches, and personally don't have an issue with either one.

It needs to be made very clear, from the outset, which you intend to use when running your games.

@sunny said in GMs and Players:

Yeah, it was a highly specific question, because the answer actually matters to me. I was curious how he'd approach that situation, and I got my answer.

I definitely understand and respect that. However, I also understand how a sudden and jarring very specific and targeted question in a conversation mostly focusing on general examples of player behaviour, could feel somewhat like an attack or an emotionally driven thing. Especially when done publicly.

@roz said in GMs and Players:

@krmbm said in GMs and Players:

I think the "abusive ex-husband" scenario is ridiculous and over-the-top

Is it? I have known people who have been in the situation of RL abusers stalking them on MUs. It may not be COMMON, but it’s not somehow outlandish.

It's definitely an exception to any 'standard' of administration we propose. It's important to remember that exceptions always exist and we'll need to be adaptable, of course, but it did feel like a left-field and highly specific question in a conversation on generalities.

@icanbeyourmuse said in GMs and Players:

I'll totally support it as 'canon'

I definitely misspoke when I made my canon comments, so allow me to correct myself: You can have whatever story you want among players - within reason as we've already agreed. I'm just not going to support it, encourage it, or reward it if you take it to discord or elsewhere. ETA: Because I don't want to encourage it be seen to officially approve of it.

@krmbm said in GMs and Players:

Do you need/want to keep them at arm's reach for some reason?

Yes. When you have to enforce rules, you're not their friend. You need to keep that boundary. Secondly, they're people on the internet, not my friends. You're all not my friends, you're people on the internet. We've spent hundreds of hours together, but I don't know any of you.

The older I get, the more I realise what I view as reasonable and what others view as reasonable are often not the same. Someone's going to be annoyed by what I think, say, or do regardless.

@faraday said in GMs and Players:

Any player who demands that of you is just being unreasonable and you can tell them so.

Drawing us full circle to the original thesis of this thread, of setting reasonable expectations.

@mietze said in GMs and Players:

If someone is an abusive shitbag on discord, they're not NOT going to be an abusive shitbag on the game, eventually.

And that's when it becomes my problem to solve. That's when I can investigate to determine the truth. Because people lie, quite a bit.

This isn't to say that I'll never intervene ever at all no way no how. It's setting a default expectation that my authority and my concern lies with the game, that's it.

Discord has its own policing structure (whether it's effective or not I have no clue) as well as outside authorities. If @Sunny came to me with her tale I'd keep an eye on the alleged ex-husband, and if things happened on the game I'd deal with it. I don't know if Sunny's telling the truth, or if this person is who Sunny thinks they are, or anything like that, so I'd want to set the base expectation of innocence.

@faraday said in GMs and Players:

And if it's not nonsense and is actual good story development... why do you care where it originated?

It goes back to the lack of administrative ability in the likely event of issues. I honestly don't care if it happens elsewhere, I just don't want to approve of it happening elsewhere. So if I'm seen to allow it, that can be taken as "official permission" or what-have-you and will lead to arguments and problems.

@faraday You and I seem to have a different view on what I mean by canon. I don't care what other players do or decide between themselves. But what happens on the game trumps what happens outside of it.

You can have your google doc talking about an epic battle in the town square all you want. If it didn't happen on the game itself, it didn't happen. I'm not beholden to whatever nonsense people decide to say happened in their other-spaces RP.

@faraday said in GMs and Players:

Not canon though? That's ridiculous.

No it isn't, you simply disagree with it.

@misadventure said in GMs and Players:

I get the impression that people find trying to short hand your needs in a way players can better link up with each other and staff is a hostile thought.

I don't really understand the point you're trying to make, here. You specifically mentioned email and forum RP, and @Derp specifically said "off-game RP" is "all kinds of a bad idea." Something I agree with.

Not every game is designed with async play in mind, but if you manage to get it to work in your group on a game, that's... probably fine? Personally having an actual 'scene' via @mail or pages sounds like a pain in the ass, but if you make it work then whatever.

That's all happening on the game, though. That's all stuff we can adjudicate and otherwise deal with. But I'm of the view that if it's happening on discord or a forum, or via email, carrier pigeon, smoke signal, or anything that is not on the game then it's not 'canon' and not 'my problem.'

@three-eyed-crow said in GMs and Players:

I'm not sure what 'paged RP' is or how it differs from other kinds of async or messenger/text scenes?

It's RP that happens through pages, rather than @emits/poses.

@misadventure said in GMs and Players:

Are the alternate forms of RP acceptable, for what kinds of scenes: alternate window rp, paged rp, on game mail RP, forum RP, email RP, etc?

If it doesn't happen on my server (or one I have any kind of legal stake in, eg renting, borrowing, loaning, contracting, or otherwise engaging with on a formal basis), in my game, with my code, that I can directly audit and look over, you're on your own. That should be the base level of understanding. That's like going to the manager of a Denny's to complain about what happens at the McDonalds just because you took Denny's food with you.

@horrorhound said in GMs and Players:

Don't talk shit.

I mean. Um. That's kind of what this place is for.

But to avoid personal attacks, I shall simply say this: Some players have an over-inflated sense of their own importance, and become soul-sucking time-stealing dredges of willpower. It becomes taxing to deal with them - as staff and as a player.

Should this then result in the emotional draining player being removed? Yes, but I don't think staff should be given too much hassle for trying to soldier through.

@ganymede said in GMs and Players:

But if the players are human

@silverfox said in Decriminalise Pretty:

I hate when flirting is all a character does. Like, just stop. Please. Intact with me some other way. Show me some kind of range.

I can creep on you and get jealous of every interaction you have with any other person too, if that's helpful.

I'll decriminalise pretty the minute pretty people stop making a big deal out of it. It's a MU, we're all pretty, develop an actual personality.

I believe it's part of the forum's more general shitfuckery with... whatever technical shit is going on with it behind the scenes that makes it break.

@ominous said in Forum wonk:

@tinuviel

I will allow this only if the archive is named The Book of Grudges.

That's Facebook.

@faraday said in Forum wonk:

The only low-effort, low-cost option is to start fresh, and I don't think anybody really wants that.

Only if there's a read-only archive so we can hold grudges accurately.