Changes to rule 9!

[GelatinousGlob]

 

Im disappointed that ive been made to remove my oldest character Dick Payne due to changes in rule 9 prohibiting that name. I suggest reverting the rule to the previous definition, I put so much effort into creating a reputation on station with that character and now it is gone. Im especially disappointed because it is a real name of many very successful people including real estate agents, bankers, there is even a Dick Payne Jr.!

 

These rules are getting ridikulous, even SpongeBob would be able to say this stuff. PG isn't good enough, gotta go for a G rating on a super niche game that has objectives to murder people in cold blood and burn them alive and has organs flying all around and all sorts of terrible crap going on.

 

[davidchan]

Did you ever consider changing your character's name to Richard and just insisting everyone call you Dick?

[Spacemanspark]

 

So you're saying that we should revert a rule because you want to play a character that is literally named 'dick pain' (And don't tell me that wasn't the joke.)?

 

 

 

[Fj45]

 

I cry a single tear Glob.

 

Find a new name.

 

[Dinarzad]

 

So you're saying that we should revert a rule because you want to play a character that is literally named 'dick pain' (And don't tell me that wasn't the joke.)?

 

 

 

You mean like people who wanna play 'Bulma Briefs' and 'Fox McCloud' and insist it's not a joke?

=^)

 

If we're gonna have this rule, it should probably go full measure and not half measure with very flimsy bits here an there that are kinda okay for.... reasons that don't match to the rest of the rule.

Frankly, I'd rather have it abolished back to how it used to be in the first place, since I really don't care if people are named 'Fox McCloud' or Hughe Jass' or some other permutation of odd nomenclature.

 

[Spacemanspark]

If we're gonna have this rule, it should probably go full measure and not half measure with very flimsy bits here an there that are kinda okay for.... reasons that don't match to the rest of the rule..

[Fox McCloud]

 

Frankly, I'd rather have it abolished back to how it used to be in the first place

 

 

Only it's never been this way--ever. We've never used rule 9 for anything other than blatantly stupid "asdflkhjaskdrewazxc234213!!@$!@#", controversial "Adolf Hitler", real world famous "Barack Obama", or blatantly offensive names "Ass L Icker". We've never bwoinked people for having the name of a fictional character. It's been that way since literally day one.

 

[Spacemanspark]

Doesn't really change the fact that it's still a famous well known character and fairly immersion ruining.

[IcyV]

 

It's been that way since literally day one.

 

Given you weren't there to any degree for a very long time, I have to call you out on that. There were some names that weren't just purely retarded that were messaged about. I actually respected people's want for light immersion and didn't want 50x starfoxes and Matt Damons running around. Names are much more ridiculous now than ever before, in my opinion.

 

[monkeysfist101]

I'm with Icy on this. Not only is making Rule 9 less stringent a bad idea, truthfully, it should be more strict. The names right now are ridiculous. What's wrong with picking a real name? If you want a made-up name, play as an alien. As long as you're playing an original character and not something like "Falco Lombardi," I'm good.

[Dumbdumn5]

 

Please keep in mind that we had a vote on the naming rules with this as a result.

 

 

To my knowledge, I've not received a single ahelp about any names other than something such as hitler or anything along the lines of Hughe Jass and Dick Payne. If it appears immersion breaking, ahelp it or make a player complaint. My personal beliefs on the matter are that as long as they offer some decent RP and aren't overly annoying, drawing constant attention to their name, they're fine. For example I'm not fine with Groot players if they only say that one line "I am Groot!" and if I could I would warn people against it. Since people keep bringing up Bulma and Fox, I don't believe they make an excessive amount of either Dragonball or Starfox to any extent aside from their name. The roleplay is entirely unique. While it may not seem fair, names such as Dick Payne and Hughe Jass are fairly immature, and do not promote RP in most contexts, though I personally didn't mind them either. However, they are fairly immature choices for names. Yes, it's a game that makes no sense, yes there are areas where we accept immaturity or body part references (Submissive Steve anyone?) but aside from that, having a constant reference to dick pain is fairly odd, and for some people that can be said with fictional names as well.

 

While we should have more immersion and RP, but we don't necessarily have to stomp over names in general. Feel free to have a realistic name, but having fifty Barack Obamas or Sarah Palins seems just as immersion breaking as fifty Groots. Names, as they stand, are in fairly good shape all things considered. We don't have repeat names, and we don't have people copying each other constantly. Those who choose fictional character names, have yet to become a massive in-game problem from the perspective of the majority of players I've seen. Whether this is a lack of ahelping, sharing opinion, or something else entirely remains to be seen. What I have seen, however, is unique and interesting RP between these characters and others, that does not involve their name other than statements and questions directed towards them. If Fox is genuinely doing things that scream "I am Fox McCloud, look at me, I have a famous name, hey ever played Starfox?" or Bulma is constantly referencing dragon ball in a way that screams " I am Bulma Briefs, I represent Capsule Corp (or whatever the corporation was) as X Ambassador of [insert facility here]" then the amount of ahelps about these incidents are incredibly low and should be ahelped more often. Having been on the past two days for about 7-10 hours each day, I can safely say that I have not seen a single occurrence of this on any referential character.

 

The amount of complaining that people do on the forums in threads that are unrelated to these two characters, does not reflect the complaints in game or in the proper areas of this forum. Comparatively, we have received a large number of complaints in-game about names such as Hughe Jass and Dick Payne, claiming that their names were, in their opinion, immersion breaking during their experience with them. This has yet to be seen in such large amounts with the names Bulma Briefs, Fox McCloud, and even the people who decide to play Groots. If they genuinely act in a way that breaks immersion that has a direct correlation to and is caused by their name, ahelp it or make a player complaint.

 

As I've said, we have already had a vote on the naming rules, and the majority of the administration voted against the body part and real life names.

 

P.S: Do note that there is a difference between having a problem with the users and the characters, meta grudging is not tolerated.

 

[IcyV]

 

You can't honestly be using Fox and Bulma as roleplay standards. You must not see how they play if you are.

 

Bulma can derail an entire round and make comms literally retarded. It turns into borderline ERP and some nasty lewd jokes. I've quit some rounds just because I'm purely disgusted by what the round becomes, because they love the attention and bad jokes. Lot's of people all over the forums, ooc, and reddit have mentioned how they have a problem with what Bulma does. Don't ignore it for the sake of convenience. This isn't entirely a problem with the name itself, but it certainly doesn't help when you give them an already recognizable name that makes people notice. Maybe I just see entirely different complaints, but I have seen issues with them over ahelps, private chats, you name it.

 

Names are a really important thing. I've seen at least three variations of Starfox, several groots, several DBZ references, references to TV shows, all of it. Funnily enough, I see names of IC famous people totally ignored as well. Rule 9 isn't enforced in any form anymore if a number of people don't have an issue with it. I even noticed this back when I was an admin, I was just about the only one that ever cared to enforce it to any level for the sake of maintaining it.

 

The rule either needs to be looked over, enforced more heavily, or removed. God only knows it's mostly justification for an admin to remove a name they don't like at the moment.

 

[Dumbdumn5]

 

You can't honestly be using Fox and Bulma as roleplay standards. You must not see how they play if you are.

 

Bulma can derail an entire round and make comms literally retarded. It turns into borderline ERP and some nasty lewd jokes. I've quit some rounds just because I'm purely disgusted by what the round becomes, because they love the attention and bad jokes. Lot's of people all over the forums, ooc, and reddit have mentioned how they have a problem with what Bulma does. Don't ignore it for the sake of convenience. This isn't entirely a problem with the name itself, but it certainly doesn't help when you give them an already recognizable name that makes people notice. Maybe I just see entirely different complaints, but I have seen issues with them over ahelps, private chats, you name it.

 

Names are a really important thing. I've seen at least three variations of Starfox, several groots, several DBZ references, references to TV shows, all of it. Funnily enough, I see names of IC famous people totally ignored as well. Rule 9 isn't enforced in any form anymore if a number of people don't have an issue with it. I even noticed this back when I was an admin, I was just about the only one that ever cared to enforce it to any level for the sake of maintaining it.

 

The rule either needs to be looked over, enforced more heavily, or removed. God only knows it's mostly justification for an admin to remove a name they don't like at the moment.

 

You appear to have mainly, if not only focused on Bulma, which I understand, has moments where they do become ridiculous, however, as far as complaints go. There have not been an overwhelming number of complaints relating to the issues stated within your post. The thing is, most of the time, rules are placed where most people have an issue with things, and in this case, from what the vote has shown, it's not an overwhelmingly majority that supports that change in the rules. Talking about recently is hard to do because of the rule change, it's become allowed, and therefore more of the names will pop up. However, in terms of my post, what are your issues with Fox's RP, as you stated your displeasure by saying that

You can't honestly be using Fox and Bulma as roleplay standards.

 

[Spacemanspark]

 

 

P.S: Do note that there is a difference between having a problem with the users and the characters, meta grudging is not tolerated.

Ayyyy whoa, I'm not metagrudging anyone.

And I don't believe IcyV is either.

 

[IcyV]

While I respect your point of them having "unique and interesting" RP, my issue did mostly lie with Bulma there. I just can't entirely respect the way Fox plays when it largely comes down to blowing things up as he sees fit or goofing off with important tasks. That's been my experience at least. I can name a lot of other people that do the same things they do. It's a personal problem I have with the way things are going. Their names only serve to inspire more ridiculous names which leads to those people, and others, acting ridiculous with them.

[Surrealistik]

 

I'm just gonna say that I love how a vote that agrees with the admins is upheld as enshrining their policy, but one that doesn't with almost as much participation is repeatedly dismissed as not being representative when it features at least a quarter of all regulars, and half the average server population.

 

Also I agree with almost everything Icy has said thus far in the thread.

 

I'm with Icy on this. Not only is making Rule 9 less stringent a bad idea, truthfully, it should be more strict. The names right now are ridiculous. What's wrong with picking a real name? If you want a made-up name, play as an alien. As long as you're playing an original character and not something like "Falco Lombardi," I'm good.

 

Or play as a clown, but yes, as I've said previously it should be more stringent.

 

[monkeysfist101]

Regarding that poll that you keep bringing up, I'd like to call to attention the fact that most of the regulars were not involved with that poll. After the rule was changed, another poll was put up by the player base and for the roughly 20 minutes before it was locked down on the basis that the Admins didn't care for the player base's opinion on the matter, the vote was heavily leaning towards rule 9 reverting to its original form. Let's be frank here, Rule 9 was changed to cater to rule-breakers who had gotten away with it of long enough that they felt entitled to keeping their characters.

[Dumbdumn5]

 

The majority of it boils down to personal preference. Whether or not it appeals to you or it doesn't. While I can say that I prefer having these names in, whether it's lack of care, not seeing any impact in regards to the name, or a mixture of both, I can't say. All I know is that I prefer the rule as it stands. A lot of issues could be helped by people ahelping, however I've seen time and time again that some people let thing slide rather than ahelp the issue they're having, letting the player get away with more, and generally allowing more rule-breaking to occur. If we haven't seen a name, we haven't noticed the name. Usually a constant stream of logs blots out most names, often leaving us with only minor insight as to what's going on at all times. Sure we could turn the logs off, but then we'd miss information about explosions, attacks, the singularity, and other issues that would affect the round in a large way.

 

I get it, the names can be a major source of immersion killing, I've seen people stop interacting with characters before just because of it. Some people have knowledge of these characters, and from what's been said in this thread, it's apparent that it's both a mix of behavior and the name. Personally, I don't see how the name should affect what you think of the character or your disposition against them, but I can always be wrong about such things. If their behavior is an issue in-character, open a player complaint.

 

As for what spacemanspark wrote.

 

P.S: Do note that there is a difference between having a problem with the users and the characters, meta grudging is not tolerated.

Ayyyy whoa, I'm not metagrudging anyone.

And I don't believe IcyV is either.

This was not directed at anybody, and I apologize if my tone suggested so. If I'm addressing specific people, I'll address them with their proper name and a response as such.

 

In terms of Icy's posts. I see what you mean by getting people to act ridiculous with them, but I'm not entirely sure it's all or mostly due to the name. If Dread had developed the character as something other than Bulma with the same personality, I get the feeling that people would still act the same way around his character. Does that make it any better? No. However, that means it doesn't always have to do with the name. We have players who have popular characters without a reference name, for example Novus Lem or Jayson Hawke, and though they're used in events. People act differently around them, and they usually get more leeway due to their reputation and the personality preceding it. It's good to have humor every now and then, and from personal experience, I know they use it far more than just every now and then. I think the inspiration doesn't spring from the names, but more the popularity of the people with those names, and they actions they choose. People who want to have a popular character for those that think such things are "important" may try to mimic them to become more appealing to the populous. Their behaviors set an example, and right now, the example they're setting, in your opinion, is not correct. At least that's how I'm looking at it.

 

As for surrealistik's post. We've discussed the issue of illegitimacy regarding votes here. viewtopic.php?f=48&t=4931

We couldn't accept it due to reddit drama, and we explained this thoroughly. The thread has since been locked due to the major derailing and violation of its intended purpose. The rule was

WARNING: This thread is to be taken seriously, and the discussion to be kept civil. Inflammatory language, hate-inducing comments, personal attacks, mean "jokes" or general smart-assery won't be tolerated and will result in posts deleted and forum warnings issued.

 

As for the comment about population. This has also been discussed in the medborg 2.0 thread here. viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5037

 

Please, do not bring these issues into other topics, and instead discuss your issues with a head administrator or coder. I'm saying this because these two threads were shut down due to a long string of arguments over these two topics. Not to stop you from stating your opinion on the matter at hand.

 

As for monkeyfist's reply. I'm well aware of this, as it was a purely administrative decision. The rule was voted on by the administrative team, and was met with resistance regarding the changes relating to fictional names of famous characters. Although it should have gone through community review. The head administrators have stated that it was purely meant for administrator discussion at the time the vote was created. Rule 9 was originally changed on an agreed vote from the administration team.

 

Should you need clarification on any number of the topics I've discussed here, please reply stating the phrase that was unclear to you.

 

[monkeysfist101]

 

Please keep in mind that we had a vote on the naming rules with this as a result.

 

 

 

As for monkeyfist's reply. I'm well aware of this, as it was a purely administrative decision. The rule was voted on by the administrative team, and was met with resistance regarding the changes relating to fictional names of famous characters. Although it should have gone through community review. The head administrators have stated that it was purely meant for administrator discussion at the time the vote was created. Rule 9 was originally changed on an agreed vote from the administration team.

 

So...which one was it? Something tells me that we don't have 34 admins, but hey, I could be wrong. Now, if you're telling me that we had a vote AND it was

a purely administrative decision

that seems like either conflicting evidence or a flat out lie.

 

 

If you want people to stop complaining about it, put up a poll with 100% transparency. Set it up so that it will prompt players with a link to the poll when they log onto the server and let it run for about a month. Do not include three versions of "abstain" that one side can use against the other and for the love of Nar'Sie, don't word it like "Do you want to keep it as it is?" and "Do you want to ruin fun?" Whichever way the poll lands, enforce it. Hard.

 

If you want to believe that for a server that peaks over 100 players almost daily that the opinions of the player base don't matter, go ahead. I've said my piece.

 

[Dumbdumn5]

 

Monkeysfist, the poll shown tallied the total votes, as you could tick the boxes and mark multiple choices, as shown in the image. Thirty four seperate admins did not vote. Nobody stated "Do you want to ruin fun" in any context to my knowledge. If they have, please display a quote. The vulpakin vote should have had a yes, no, or abstain option as with other votes, although the "too early to discuss this" option, leaned towards leaving the race in longer to observe the results. Regardless, it should have been yes, no, or abstain

 

As for the matter on player votes not meaning anything. I personally don't believe it's a complete autocracy, however the current consensus, at least that I've gathered, is that in the end the decision falls to administrator votes.

 

[monkeysfist101]

 

Regardless, it should have been yes, no, or abstain

That's the problem. It should be a flat yes or no. The act of abstaining implies that you're not voting, so why put a vote for that. I saw multiple occasions where both sides were claiming that the abstain side supported them. "They don't care so you should leave it in."

 

[Dumbdumn5]

 

Regardless, it should have been yes, no, or abstain

That's the problem. It should be a flat yes or no. The act of abstaining implies that you're not voting, so why put a vote for that. I saw multiple occasions where both sides were claiming that the abstain side supported them. "They don't care so you should leave it in."

Abstaining to me shows how many people are on the fence and still watching it... though commenting about how you abstain is sort of odd, unless it states your opinion on both sides. It's good to have somebody neutral on the issue talk about things rather than text walls from each side like it usually is, which, of course I'm guilty of making. As long as it isn't just an "I abstained" post, then it should be fairly useful data. But we digress, we're here to discuss rule 9.

 

[monkeysfist101]

 

Regardless, it should have been yes, no, or abstain

That's the problem. It should be a flat yes or no. The act of abstaining implies that you're not voting, so why put a vote for that. I saw multiple occasions where both sides were claiming that the abstain side supported them. "They don't care so you should leave it in."

Abstaining to me shows how many people are on the fence and still watching it... though commenting about how you abstain is sort of odd, unless it states your opinion on both sides. It's good to have somebody neutral on the issue talk about things rather than text walls from each side like it usually is, which, of course I'm guilty of making. As long as it isn't just an "I abstained" post, then it should be fairly useful data. But we digress, we're here to discuss rule 9.

I'm talking about the much needed community poll for rule 9, so I /am/ discussing rule 9.

 

[Dumbdumn5]

Sorry! Meant I digress, was talking about abstaining instead of names.

[IcyV]

 

I'm going to be the devil's advocate and say that the polls are a joke, even the admin only ones. It's never been a democracy and never will be. Even for the admins, only opinions are welcome and very minorly considered. It's a fairly rigged poll in the first placed given quite a few members of the team would be affected should it be expanded upon. You can't give an honest or genuinely fair result based on a closed poll from people that are directly biased against several of the results.

 

Don't pretend otherwise. Votes are a joke. Admin only votes even more so. This doesn't mean they can't be discussed and a fair result can't come to, but this is not the right way to do it if you ever want to pretend that you are remotely for what the users actually want.