<<You want conflict situations but you don't want to have to resolve conflict situations if something gets out of hand?

I guess I should point out, I do believe there is a difference between PvP and PvP-harassment. But again, if someone is harassing another player, what is to stop the harassed player from asking for help from another player?

The big problem with reporting for PVP harassment is most people want to call everything harassment. If I was to take a guess would say 95%+ of all PvP does not involve harassment. Equally so, I'd say well over 50% of people willing to report for PvP would consider 1 death harassment. And I'd say almost for sure that 100% of those people have NEVER tried to get someone bigger to help them. It reminds me of spoiled kids that learned early on that it is a lot easier to run to someone (mommy and daddy) to fix/get something for you, than to fix/get it yourself.

Falker

Well I will advocate a possible solution to this and I encourage anyone else to try.

As I stated before I was set guarded because really I did not want to have to deal with the possibility of random attacks while training and preferred the conflict to be a result of RP not random non-sense. While being guarded I have not had to deal with the random crap.

I will switch to Open and will even keep a log of any non-rp vs rp related conflicts (if they even occur). And I will keep a log of who is involved and the what instigated it.

I figure if some others join me, rather than relying on this unsubstantiated allegorical rhetoric concerning who is morally more-just, we can have direct examples and events.

I do this for the sake of science and so that my children and my children's children will not have to relive this argument in the future.

Watch the EC for future posts on this test.

Thank you,

Player of Lomelinde

>>If someone would prefer to be Guarded or Closed, then it tells me that they are more close-minded and OOC'ly affected by things that happen in a fictional text-based game than someone who is Open.

-Vinjince's player

I know it's considered hyper cool in some circles to be totally unaffected by what happens to your character. And yet... you've spent the patience and effort and time to make your Barbarian one of the show piece combatants of DR.

If you were totally unaffected you wouldn't have done that. People seem to love to be, 'LOL, people caring about a text based game!' but it doesn't really alter the fact that they're playing one. If somebody doesn't care at all or (in the case of some folks) seems to only care if they can cause a negative emotional response in others, what's the point?

Sorry. Wasn't meant as an insult.

>>-Vinjince's player

>>I know it's considered hyper cool in some circles to be totally unaffected by what happens to your character. And yet... you've spent the patience and effort and time to make your Barbarian one of the show piece combatants of DR.

>>If you were totally unaffected you wouldn't have done that. People seem to love to be, 'LOL, people caring about a text based game!' but it doesn't really alter the fact that they're playing one. If somebody doesn't care at all or (in the case of some folks) seems to only care if they can cause a negative emotional response in others, what's the point

Your first paragraph is a bit odd. I have no idea where you're coming up with this clique, sub-culture, in-crowd, mindset, but it's clear to me that you really are just repeating some info that somebody else spoonfed you. People are affected by whatever they're affected by - whether his reactions are considered "hyper cool" or not, I can 100% guarantee you the player of Vinjince doesn't give a damn.

I'd also like to add that if you train your text for a few years, you're going to get more and more skills and stats. This, inevitably, will turn that text into what you apparently view as a "show piece combatant". I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove - are you?

Of course people, Vinjince included, care about a text game that they pay to play. I care too. Do I care if someone fake-kills my text thereby causing me to stop watching the fake numbers increase for a 10-20 minute period while adding some exciting drama to my playing time? Not really. Does that make my hyper cool in some circles? Are you going to revolt against me because I am now in the juvenile in-crowd? Man this seat at the cool kids' table is so comfortable.

Thanks for the response. I appreciate it. And no... I didn't think you randomly went around antagonizing others. I just consider Guarded a handy off switch for those that do, while enabling me to still get the consequences for my actions if I'm done something that merits them.

In the paraphrased and amended words of Wise Glemm the Glib Cynic not so many posts ago, don't worry so much about what other people think. Be aware of it and respect it, but don't dwell on it. Don't obsess over what "might" happen, and have fun with what "is" happening.

In the often repeated words of Reene, assume good faith. If you assume the best about the other person, things turn out way better than if you assume the worst. Forgive and forget, let by-gones be by-gones.

In my own words, when in doubt, communicate intentions, or just plain communicate, with more repect than you would expect for yourself. You can argue all you want how OOC whispers ruin the RP, but nothing ruins RP faster than bitter player fueds based on simple misunderstandings, bad assumptions, or differences in style.

Or simply insert the relevant bits from every major human social contract and moral code of conduct since Hammurabi [HERE].

The more we can play by that, the less the PVP setting matters.

~Brian/Bahb

>I have a strong hunch that the worst that ever happens to Vinjince is an open roll. I wonder how much your perspective would change if you DID get a bully for a while.

I'm not Vinjince, but I'm friends with him and your hunch would be wrong.

This is discussion on the Profile system (again).

This is not discussion on Vinjince and his on going experiences in Dragon Realms, while I am sure he has had some exciting adventures, its just derailing the thread.

If you have made your argument and have nothing more to add, then it's time to let it go.



Annwyl
Senior Board Monitor

If you've questions or comments, take it to e-mail by writing Senior Board Monitor DR-Annwyl@play.net, or Message Board Supervisor DR-Cecco@play.net.

<<while enabling me to still get the consequences for my actions if I'm done something that merits them.

Except profile guarded/opened/closed really doesnt matter if your actions have done something to merit consequences - IE grant consent. All it means is you are really saying that you want everything IG to happen on your terms, and arent willing to accept everything that happens as they happen. Must be nice to have that handy 'off-switch'. I guess I would just call it something else.

Falker

Summary of this incredibly circular and pointless argument so far:

OpenAdvocate: "I think guarded people are bad business and I avoid interaction with them."
GuardedGuy: "I think open people are bad business and I avoid interaction with them."

So... tell me again. Why are you all arguing about this...?

Every time this thread rears its ugly head, I just want to throw my hands up in the air and change my profile to:

Roleplay Stance: None
PvP Stance: Closed
Quote: "Profile Stances are not the defaults. You are all a bunch of whiners. I'm out."

-Evran

Crackling with unspent rage since 386A.V.

"Best just to be safe rather than sorry, and pretend the closed/guarded people don't exist when any sort of confrontation might arise, whether violent or not, unless you personally know them and how they will react. Less chance to get pulled up and have your time wasted having to explain why you had consent to a GM."

And I think this doesn't conflict with Kougen's point. The system is working when you do this. If you choose to walk away from Flavius because you checked and he is Guarded, then its all good. I will not regret the lack of interaction. However, I will not be checking your Profile, because I don't care what anyones profile is set to. I play the game the way I play the game. I will choose whether to interact with your character or not based upon how you play your character.

<<URUTU/KAXIS,>>

<<You seem to have an issue with people suggesting others to go open. Not everyone is like you. If you don't like it for yourself then go about your own business.>>

If you're still thinking this is the issue, then it's difficult to even know how to further break this down for you. You sound like an intelligent guy, so I can only figure that you're making this up on purpose just to stoke controversy. The post you're responding to had this exchange of ours in it:

<<I don't see why people are extremely critical of others suggesting to go Open.>>
<<They're critical of suggestions that if they don't do it your way then they're just being close-minded or selfish.>>

Notice how I very deliberately said the issue is with your attempts to criticize people who don't agree with you. Nothing more. Trying to twist my words into some kind of attack on Open people and Open profiles will not work. I never said or implied that if anyone doesn't use the same profile settings I have then they're close-minded or blurring the line between text driven gaming and OOC. That's strictly a Vinjince tactic.

<<I have made only a few posts with my opinions in it. I was careful not to aggressively attack anyone's opinion in this thread. Maybe you should go back and reread everything.>>

You didn't get overly nasty. But it comes through loud and clear that anyone not doing it your way is doing it wrong. Maybe you should reread your posts and look up phrases like "close-minded" in the dictionary? This isn't the only thread you've posted on about this subject either. You've left a long trail of fingerprints over time.

<<If you don't understand how someone willing to accept all forms of CvC/PvP is more open-minded than someone who doesn't (it's obvious this insults you) then I'm not sure how to put it to you.>>

I honestly do not understand why you can't keep two completely different topics separate. And it's the same two topics over and over again. But I see this a lot. This is the most common logic error I encounter into when I debate/discuss issues.

I have never at any time said Open people were wrong or close-minded or any other derogatory remark. Trying to claim that's what I said only sounds foolish. It's not anywhere in my postings. Nada. And it's not there because I'm all for people being Open if they so choose. I think that's great. I'm all for them PvPing them out conflict and RP to their hearts desire. That's why they pay their money each month.

Rather, my remarks are directed at your comments and your attitude. NOT for being Open. Hey, go for it! I support your decision to be Open. In fact, I'm delighted that you enjoy the game as however best suits you. I hope everyone does the same. I know I do. I hope everyone who wants to go Open will go Open.

<<don't sit there and whine about my opinions on the matter.>>

Neither you nor I have shown any level of whininess in this thread, so I'm not certain why you felt the need to slip in a jab here by implying I'm whiner. We're disagreeing, but we've kept it on the adult level as far as I can tell. Let's keep it that way. I'll just chalk this up to your insult addiction and move on.

<<If I see that someone (such as yourself, Kaxis) is completely unwilling to try something new>>

You really have no idea what you're talking about here, but whatever. I'll just keep smiling and nodding.

<<All I'm doing is suggesting others to try it out.>>

If this were truly all you were doing, then this exchange wouldn't be happening. I totally support attempts to "suggest" to people to go Open. You enjoy being Open. You think other people would enjoy it, so you try to convince them to try going Open. Hey, I'm all about that. I think you should talk to more people about going Open.

But in the end, if they decide not to go Open, just wish them a good day and let it go. Don't call them close-minded or imply they can't help letting OOC emotions blur the line between reality and fantasy or whatever else. Don't come to the board and post comments designed to make them feel bad about their decision. Just take a deep breath and let it go. It'll be a zen moment for you. You'll feel better, I promise.

That is all I have ever said. That's all this disagreement has ever been about, nothing more.

Anyway, I've said all I wanted to say, so I'm bowing out of the discussion and moving on to other things.

Enjoy your gaming, Vinjince, and good luck.

Kaxis

---

TIP OF THE DAY:
A heavy crossbow is a heavy crossbow type weapon.

>This thread is not a debate. Its pointless repetition by both sides of the same things over and over... and over again.

You're almost completely correct! I agree, it's a pointless repetition by both sides over and over again, definitely. But there's one more data element at play here: neither side can possibly see, acknowledge, or understand the other side's point of view. They each in turn categorically reject the opposition whilst barking their statements of fact. Indeed, it is the keystone of their beliefs.

My view, I guess, is that if the open people get what they want with other open people, and the closed/guarded people get whatever it is they want, then it basically functions. That is, it limps on at the most basic level possible. I still think improvements could be made, largely just in how each setting is described, but I guess there is little interest in changing it much at this point. It works! Kinda..

---

A still more glorious dawn awaits.

>>
Makes sense, justified or not. Guarded people are basically people saying they are open to PvP, BUT if they start it (which is basically granting consent, which is no different that being closed). So they arent willing to RP on anyone else's terms. Really there should be PvP Open, and PvP Closed. Get rid of the fence riders, and just call it like it is.

It's possible that this is the way that most of them actually are but Guarded is supposed to be They are open to PvP as long as both sides know it's coming and agree to it. Closed is I don't want to PvP at all no matter the situation

>>I just don't want to deal with certain very specific people, and going guarded was the higher road vs. reporting them for harassment.<<

It's really all the same thing. You're deterring them by either reporting (for harassment, when Open) or threatening to report (for PvP, when Guarded). There is no moral high ground.



- Mazrian

The Flying Company
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d194/huldahspal/flyingcompany.png

I'd like to see a fourth stance "PvP" which means guarded vs. guarded or closed people, and Open vs. Open and PvP people.

That would be my ideal solution, but I don't think it will ever happen.

Basically, to create two separate communities that cannot interact except across the current "consent" lines, one that is self-policed and one that relies on the GMs instead.

Basically, a way for people to formally state "consider me open if you're open" which I've seen in more than one guarded person's profile.

-- Player of Szrael --

This thread boils down to this for me:

1. I will probably lose out if I play the game by what someone else puts in a profile.
2. If I have to check a profile to see if someone is 'likely' to report, I should probably rethink my current actions.

<<If it happens now, I can check their profile. If they are Open, then I don't have to worry about getting a warning. If they are Guarded... I'd hope the current GM staff will show a little leeway, though I'd be hesitant. If they are Closed, then I have to be aware that if they report I'll get a warning.>>

Yep, something like that.

- Simon

<<Thats not what I interpret from reading the definition.

That's because you dont understand what he's saying. Your other problem is you seem to think that quoting a definition or reading the stated policy of a stance is clear cut and doesnt lead to interpretation.

Basically he is saying in the grey area's of policy (Yes, there are many of them), it can become very likely that he can get a warning in a situation where the GM gets to decide if he had consent or not.

-In the case of an OPEN player, it doesnt matter, reporting wouldnt be an issue.
-In the case of a guarded player, a GM may be forced to look at the fact that the person is guarded and involved in PvP, so getting killed was probably justified, but the GM still gets to make that call (which is where the hesitation comes in).
-In the case of a closer person, the GM doesnt really 'have to' make any motive call. They can decide to just use the book of policy, and say that the attacking person didnt have consent on the closed person (even though the closed person was involved in PvP) and issue the attacker a warning.

Falker