>>People upset enough by a GM consult to 'ruin their day' really ought to spend some time figuring out what's so upsetting to them and address it. That's just a life skill, there.

>>Be the profile change you want to see in others: police yourself first.

Coming from you:
:psyduck:

---

TG, TG, GL, et al.
Also: Moo.

>>It doesn't matter if you are braiding grass, sitting there doing nothing, or leading your army to victory over the Bad People. As long as you aren't OOC, you are IC and roleplaying, even if your role is that of some boring dude who just sits there and doesn't talk to anyone.<<

This is pretty much what I meant. =)

>>How is a desire to take a game towards being totally unmoderated<<

I think I didn't communicate my ideas clearly, and I apologize for that. I don't think the game should be unmoderated.

I do think that the way Policy is written and enforced creates perverse incentives that detract from the gaming experience for everybody and create extra work for the staff, and I see getting people to go PvP Open as a way to change the incentives and improve everyone's good time.


- Mazrian

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

In a perfect gaming world, experience loss for death would be temporary no matter what, item loss would not exist, and favors would strictly determine how much penalty (or how much help) you get when departing (which is basically what they do now I guess).

I know that everyone wants death to mean things, but between losing money, pooled experience, and time, I'd say there are ways to make it still mean a lot without the possible loss of permanent exp and items.

That's why everyone is in such a huff about pvp. It's not because being killed is a pain in the ass, it's because you have the chance for irreparable harm to be done to your character. If this wasn't the case, people would be much more cool about it.


-Mr. Glemm

this is like the same 3 posts repeated over and over again....


Vote DR as TOP MUD: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-cemm.html

Problem is, some people consider themselves being harassed without ever confronting the person after just one kill. I've tried to let Webster explain for them but it just doesn't work. :(

---

Vinjince Rexem'lor

Do true griefers even exist in this game anymore? Seems that all the griefers from back in the day were banned multiple times already and have moved on to other games. It seems to me that the true grifers now are people who can't wait to report and get your character warned.

<<There needs to be another msn games free trial period.

Hey, that's how I got started in DR!

Falker

It was the Golden Age. How could you forget about it. Shennanigans were so abundant it was just about impossible not to get dragged into something at any hour of any day.

This thread is now about bringing back MSN Game Zone trial subscriptions.


-Mr. Glemm

Falker just braided ten bushels of grass!

Would you like to braid grass? Play Dragonfarms now!

-Mr. Glemm

>>Hey, that's how I got started in DR!

>Me too!

I got drunk one night and became convinced that I was really a half-man-half-snake that lisped and was married to a male midget. I frantically started looking online for something I could relate to, and the rest is history.

Ahh, memories.

>>This thread is now about bringing back MSN Game Zone trial subscriptions.

No. Really.


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.

>Does being "open" invalidate your ability to report someone for bringing an OOC conflict IG? I didn't think it does, since that breaks game policy.

"OoC motivations" has got to be the only thing even harder to prove than harassment, and that's if the GM will even listen to someone who is Open reporting about PvP in the first place.

I'm also curious what policy you think it breaks, other than "What is not acceptable is to initiate combat against unsuspecting victims." (Policy 11) which being Open waives.

>Reserving the right to report unconsented PvP is, to me, similar to reserving the right to blow up squirrels with anti-aircraft missiles.

I'm sorry, but I read this complaint as "I like to reserve the right to kill people without an in-game justification. I realize this is against the rules and I can be punished for it, therefore I'm afraid to play with people who are protected by these rules."

>this is like the same 3 posts repeated over and over again....

Thanks for your contribution.

For anyone else who has lost track, the point of this thread was to request that the wording of PvP stances be adjusted to end this level of confusion and ambiguity in the system.

---

RueaDR: It really freaks me out how much fluff people wear
There isn't a limit? I just passed a girl wearing fifteen lines of fluff, I counted!
Included in this was four broaches, two garters, a girdle and a corset
how is that physically possible

<<There needs to be another msn games free trial period>>

I remember being on that chatroom a lot when playing DR from wizard. There's still a couple of players who still play from those days.

- Simon

Overall, I've avoided this thread b/c Seg is set to Open and that's that... but a question occurred to me as I was scrolling through these and caught just enough.

Folks who are set to open are still able to report harassment, are they not? I.E. BigBadBackstabbingThief kills you once randomly because you're open, let it alone. But if BBBT comes back and does it again and again and again, simply because you're open, I believe you are then allowed to report in spite of the open profile (provided you can prove harassment).

I'm another one of the lucky ones I guess -- only been killed once just because I was open, and even then I was in a place where it was more or less expected to happen eventually (Crossing cemetery, I was there to raise not to fight that night -- only resulted in momentary irritation for me).

Segmere
Shadow Priest, Baron's Own Militia

"The best cure for insomnia is to get a lot of sleep." ~WC Fields

>>Good luck getting someone warned for harassment for PvPing with someone who's Open.

Actually, I'd like to correct this. Harassment policy applies to everyone including Open people. So yes, if an Open person is killed again and again and again and again while clearly showing they'd rather for it to stop (and this does not mean yapping off and continuing with threats + insults), they are protected under the policy.

---

Vinjince Rexem'lor

>> Do true griefers even exist in this game anymore?

Yes.

>> Does being "open" invalidate your ability to report someone for bringing an OOC conflict IG? I didn't think it does, since that breaks game policy.

Open essentially means everybody in the game has consent on you, just as if you'd gwethsmashed or thumped them. You cannot report someone for it, even if the reason they killed you is because you called them a buttface via AIM.

The thing you need to realize is that RP doesn't really dictate policy beyond it being the framework in which the tit-for-tat nature of implied consent is presented. As Armifer points out, if the environment was better, we wouldn't even need consent policy. But we don't exist in a great environment, and enough of us have had negative experiences or have friends who have had negative experiences that we simply don't want to deal with it.

And yes, I believe changing my PvP stance to Guarded was the superior option compared to actually assisting and attempting to get someone punished for harassment. It wastes less of my time and the GMs' time for one, and I don't have to deal with the stigma and harassment that comes with having actually reported someone.

>> Maybe it's because I've had roles arbitrating PVP policy disputes in other games that I don't see how anyone could ever think of them as more than trivial?

Wake up one day to an email in your inbox from Lockout then see how you feel about it.

Get told you're being reported by someone being purely petty and vicious and know that even though they're just using it as an "I win" button (which is always inappropriate) your account and your ability to continue playing the game is still in serious jeopardy if you are unable to make a clear case for why you did it with examples from NEWS items - and even then that's not always enough.

I've been flat-out told by GMs that have issued me warnings that if the exact same situation was reported now that was reported X years ago that I wouldn't be issued a warning. Policy interpretations change with time and GMs, but the black marks on your account stay forever, and every consult (even the ones you don't get in any trouble in) is a black mark.

It's not a good feeling, and yes, it's very stressful. Try not to speak so authoritatively about situations you clearly haven't experienced.

---

Rev. Reene

Your mind hears Aislynn thinking, "Hrrr. Just not Caelumia. She creates multi-dimensional pain that defies the laws of anatomy."
Your mind hears Azatia thinking, "she's good like that"

>>Do true griefers even exist in this game anymore?

Define your terms.

In the current state of DR, when I run a PC I set them to Guarded. I plan to switch over to Open when I guesstimate at least 95% (or 19 out of 20) of the player base interacts with other players in good faith.

-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas

>>Define your terms.

>>In the current state of DR, when I run a PC I set them to Guarded. I plan to switch over to Open when I guesstimate at least 95% (or 19 out of 20) of the player base interacts with other players in good faith.

I can't really think of a definition of a griefer, so i borrowed one from urban dictionary.

>>Someone, usually in an online game, who intentionally, and usually repeatedly, attempts to degrade anothers experience or torment them.

I don't see too many examples of this anymore, nor do i think it's necessarily bad for the game to have griefers since it does give opportunity for others to step in and play the good guy.

>Harassment policy applies to everyone including Open people.
>My personal opinion is that I wish everyone was open and the only policy in place was a harrassment policy.

Harassment is even more ambiguous than the current Guarded PvP setting or Consent policy.

It's not even a good safety net now, and it's definitely not the solution you're looking for.

---

RueaDR: It really freaks me out how much fluff people wear
There isn't a limit? I just passed a girl wearing fifteen lines of fluff, I counted!
Included in this was four broaches, two garters, a girdle and a corset
how is that physically possible

>>It's not even a good safety net now, and it's definitely not the solution you're looking for.<<

IMO, Harassment is a better solution for two reasons.

First, harassment requires demonstrating a pattern of abuse. Minor annoyances and one-off fracases could not earn someone a warning under a strict harassment policy.

Second, because harassment requires establishing a pattern, there can be intervention steps before warnings and lockouts get issued.


- Mazrian

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