Journals

[Alex Ayres]

But Tex is right. If anyone has that much problem with someone slandering their character in a private roleplay because they think that person is using it as a means of crossing to turn people who are prone to crossing against a character they don't like, then they should come forward. I honestly don't think there's any way to prove that, either, but at the very least the admins could watch it and open up discussions to see if there's a bigger issue there.

It's easy to say "just come forward" when this isn't something that you've been the target of. I can think of many other aspects of life where people wouldn't accept "you should just come forward" as the response to fixing a problem and I personally don't accept it as the solution to this one, as that solution has been offered many, many, many times on many, many, many issues in the past, and we are still dealing with those issues, even more rampantly today than before.

I am sure that the victims of the behavior would love to come forward, but due to past experiences, and watching how this community has behaved with other issues in the past, feel like if they did they would be shamed, ridiculed, told they were being too sensitive, that their characters aren't them so they're probably imagining it, etc. etc.

While it's nice to say things like just come forward, this isn't a community that behaves in a way that fosters the type of environment where someone would feel comfortable coming forward with their story. Actions speak louder than words.

In most issues where there is a communal problem with people being targeted by some sort of negative behavior, the onus is not on the individual to "come forward." It is, resoundingly so, on the community to create an environment where that type of behavior is discouraged, and hopefully, eventually completely eradicated.

This is a role playing website. Role playing, generally, is a collaborative effort. This "rule" I am proposing, if anything, encourages people to collaborate more with others on their plots and story lines, and discourages the type of behavior that, at this point is clear, is rampant in this community.

This very discussion around a rule that encourages collaboration and discourages toxic OOC behavior and is turning it into a discussion on "policing", "censorship", and "this isn't our problem, it's the target's problem and they should come forward," to me shows how much people around here would rather be able to shit on people with immunity than create a community that fosters healthy relationships between the living, breathing human beings behind the computers, if not the characters, and try and do anything proactive to fix the blatant and obvious toxicity that surrounds the OOC side of this community.

[Meta]

It would still make more sense for someone to just come forward with concerns, Alessio.
It's a forum, not a court case. No one is on trial to be picked at and pressured. The best way to solve it; come to someone who can actually do something about it. Teachers tell students not to bully and they'll do it anyway and find another way. If a student doesn't come forward, a teacher can't help them.

This whole thing just seems quite nitpicky to me now.

[Aziza]

What she said. ^

[Meta]

Edited, for reasons.

[ladypeacek]

Actually not true. I have a very specific example of someone saying Pea did something, that just plain never happened at all. There's no way you could read it as "perspective" if they say "I watched as Pea did (insert action here) and it made me feel xyz" when...pea never actually did that thing. I never wrote it, in public, private or any rp. To me, it was an outright god mod of my character.

I am not trying to call anyone out but this did happen and it did upset me quite a bit.

But there's no way to prove that pea didn't do whatever was said. You're the only person who knows what you've written privately and not every single person knows what pea's done publically because not everyone pays attention or is around when she is.

And that's my point. You can say it was a lie and that pea never did it, and that may be true, but there's no way to prove whether it did or didn't happen. It may or may not have happened.

It's all just an argument of heresay, really.

I'm not saying it wasn't a lie that was written about pea, whatever it was, but there's literally no proof either way because the admins can't go through every single persons RPs both public -and- private [and they shouldn't] to figure out who telling the truth.

But Tex is right. If anyone has that much problem with someone slandering their character in a private roleplay because they think that person is using it as a means of crossing to turn people who are prone to crossing against a character they don't like, then they should come forward. I honestly don't think there's any way to prove that, either, but at the very least the admins could watch it and open up discussions to see if there's a bigger issue there.

Actually in this example several characters were included in having witnessed this and also included in actions that did not occur with their characters either. So...there is absolutely a way to say it did not happen, and people did speak up. The response we were given is that the writer assumed these things would happen based on what she knew about the characters, but it did not actually happen. Yet, it wasn't changed. It was used to build emotions and a storyline for her character using ours without our consent.

[Alex Ayres]

It would still make more sense for someone to just come forward with concerns, Alessio.
It's a forum, not a court case. No one is on trial to be picked at and pressured. The best way to solve it; come to someone who can actually do something about it. Teachers tell students not to bully and they'll do it anyway and find another way. If a student doesn't come forward, a teacher can't help them.

This whole thing just seems quite nitpicky to me now.

So nitpicking means to look at small or unimportant problems to criticize someone unnecessarily.

None of the issues that I have brought up, in my opinion are "small" or "unimportant" and any criticism that I've made of the community was not done "unnecessarily."

If it is your opinion that the issues that I've presented are "small" or "unimportant" well then there isn't a way to find common ground on this. And if that's your opinion, I again, feel that that says a lot about how much you actually are considering the well being of members of this community.

The difference between your teachers analogy and the community is that teachers make the rules "don't bully" and then behave in a way that shows they are serious about that rule. They have posters up, they have assemblies, guest speakers, they create rules to discourage the bullying. They create an environment where someone would feel comfortable coming forward and saying they're being bullied and won't feel like they'll be called too sensitive, or to man up, etc.

This community says things like "just come forward" or "we need more communication" and then behaves in a way that discourages people from "coming forward" and "communicating."

It isn't about what the teachers say, it is about the atmosphere that the school creates to discourage bullying. While bullying is still a problem, the school doesn't just come out and say "if you're being bullied come forward with the bullying" and then leave it at that. They then back up their talk.

Will bullying always happen? Yes. Does that mean things shouldn't be done to discourage it? No.

You specifically gave a reason as to why you didn't think it should be a rule: Because it was too hard for you to enforce.

I explained, in detail, how you were mixing up enforcing with monitoring and how, in practice, enforcing the rule would be very easy.

Your response is just "Still think it would be easier for someone to just come forward."

Honestly, I think that response is tone deaf to the reality of the community that this is and how people are treated in it. The fact that people aren't coming to you about this problem and are going to others should probably speak volumes to you about how comfortable people are coming forward about it, and the faith people have in the fact that anything they say would change anything.

In fact, I think this very thread proves them right.


Based on the fact that you decided to call what I said "nitpicking" I'm going to guess you're tired of talking about this, and so am I. You've made it clear you don't think it's important that it's a rule. I disagree, I think it should be a rule and once the people in this community can behave like adults, it can be re-evaluated.

That's fine. At this point, I am just going to be happy that the discussion happened and people have hopefully read this and internalized some of the things that were said and will now think twice about how they treat each other.

And lastly, people should know that if they just need someone to talk to, despite my insanely large ego, I am actually a pretty good listener and will gladly have a chat if you're ever feeling you have nowhere to turn, regardless of what our past might look like.


Have a good morning/afternoon/evening/night everyone.

[Church]

Stuff.

You quite literally have nothing better to do with your time, do you? Don't twist my words, Alessio, it's boring and it's not helping your case and you know fine well what I meant by nitpicking. Crossing is already against the rules. Crossing covers every single corner of this topic. It's not even ADVISED that people don't cross, it's explicitly against the rules that people don't cross. Do I need to narrow down the rules for this specifically? No. Crossing is a broader scope and if someone is crossing and using journal posts to upset you come forward. They're crossing. It's against the rules already, we don't need to narrow that down for you.

Now, I've already been amicable and I've done my part in trying to see your viewpoint to which I've offered a viable solution. You just don't agree with it. As always, you want it your way. It doesn't matter to you if a majority of the people in the discussion you made don't agree with your way and I can promise you those writers have had the same thing done to them, too.

[Grim]

All I'll say: Just how many admins do you think there are, mate?

They have lives and do what they can. They can't monitor you like a child at daycare (and yes, I'm annoyed so I'm snappy but you're presenting everything like a court room case and going into unnecessary definitions of what everyone is saying; which is a very simple thing. Not enough man power for what you're asking.). They can't implement a 'everyone talk about every negative thing you're going to say' rule. If YOU personally want to do that, by all means. Start the change you want. Have the people you talk to do it. Maybe it'll catch on.

But don't sit there and say the admins don't care. They take the time out of their busy ass lives to do what they can, unpaid. And have been offering viable solutions you keep shooting down as 'not caring'. So frankly, I just find what you said rude. That is all.

[Church]

To add; If someone has said something about your character in a post that you don't think is fair and it's upset you, ask them to take it down. If they refuse? It's the same answer; Speak To An Admin. We're not your babysitters, here. If I don't know there's a problem - and I won't, because even with that rule you want so badly in place I'd still need to be the person that reads every thread because people, according to you, don't want to talk to an admin about it. Do you see the problem?? Whether that rule is there or not makes no difference; I still need cooperation from those who've been wronged. I still need them to tell me there's a problem to even know there's a problem.
So, yes, you're nitpicking. The rule is already there; don't cross. It's just not as specific as you'd like it to be because it covers everything to do with crossing, not just talking shit about characters for OOC maliciousness.

[Grim]

Y'know what, Alessio, I have a suggestion. A legitimate one.

If you feel so strongly about this, then you get people to petition for it to be a thing; however, the admins don't have the time to do everything you're asking so why don't you take the responsibility and compile the problems people bring and send it to the admins when they happen? So they can do something about it.

That's the only counter solution I can give beyond pointing to the no crossing rule and lack of people going to the actual admins.