|
On June 20 2014 01:59 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2014 01:44 roundabound wrote:On June 20 2014 01:27 Holyflare wrote: if the people that complained in the thread about the behaviour at tl don't join this game or show interest that they would have if not for x then it just goes to show they are stirring shit for no reason Slam, is this game full yet? No, but people are supposed to apply via PM. Give it some time. oh ok good. I was worried it'd be full already and my pm to apply would be fruitless. Gimme an hour, I'm going to put together a formal application.
|
i dont think signups shoudl be up for this AND responsibility mafia because they are the same kind of game.
|
On June 20 2014 04:17 kushm4sta wrote: i dont think signups shoudl be up for this AND responsibility mafia because they are the same kind of game.
Maybe you can consolidate the 3 people that signed up for that game and the 2 that signed up for this game?
|
On June 20 2014 04:32 roundabound wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2014 04:17 kushm4sta wrote: i dont think signups shoudl be up for this AND responsibility mafia because they are the same kind of game.
Maybe you can consolidate the 3 people that signed up for that game and the 2 that signed up for this game?
k but can we use the rules for the other game cause this games' rules are ass
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
|
one of two things will happen in this game.
1. alakaslam will renege on his strict behavior rules 2. alakslam will modkill a bunch of people, thus ruining the game and wasting the hours of time players have already spent
|
This game does tend to take the new behavioral rules to a bit of an extreme.
Like I know I probably won't feel compelled to use the vast majority of listed words. But when fairly benign things like pissed is included, I'm pretty sure this setup is intended to be more of a jabbing farce at the new rules than anything else...
The real heart of the matter is just making sure people aren't complete dicks to each other. And ironically, going hardcore into censoring what words people use doesn't even work towards this goal. I'm to some degree "one of those people" that some of the more vociferous members of this community seem to be railed against. But like this isn't the way to go about things. And tbh, this isn't the way to go about "proving a point" about the rules as this isn't really in the spirit of said rules. This is something else...
I was okay with playing anyway, but holy crap looking at the glossary again the restricted list is insane.
/out
|
plus its really easy to insult someone without using offensive words.
btw kush how is your mom doing? I heard she was walking a little funny after I left last night. also you might want to wash your pillows.
|
I actually was going to the extent where INSULTS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
If this community is so arsed that they can't have even an experiment in decent behavior and instead see it as a political move, then you are all activists.
In fact this remark
On June 20 2014 12:05 Coagulation wrote: plus its really easy to insult someone without using offensive words.
btw kush how is your mom doing? I heard she was walking a little funny after I left last night. also you might want to wash your pillows.
Hints that you didn't read the OP.
|
I was feeling a little like goodkarma at first - to be honest, I don't feel like this really reflects the concerns people had with the new hosting rules. BUT...
I am actually kind of interested in this idea as an EXPERIMENT. I don't think I use any of the words on the list :3 I'll think about this one depending on how busy end of June looks
|
Oh
Game is dead. I don't feel like hosting it with all the politics.
If foolishness wants another up I could do that too. But since I am bitter it better be a last resort because it would either be ghetto mafia or host WIFOM mafia.
Image is incredibly appropriate though, foolishness forsaw this and I gave TL benefit of the doubt
Which,
Blew Up In My Face
As for Dee Dee, such is my other self (the peach loving troll )
|
On June 20 2014 14:14 Alakaslam wrote:Oh Game is dead. I don't feel like hosting it with all the politics.If foolishness wants another up I could do that too. But since I am bitter it better be a last resort because it would either be ghetto mafia or host WIFOM mafia.Image is incredibly appropriate though, foolishness forsaw this and I gave TL benefit of the doubt Which, Blew Up In My Face As for (ooh I forget her name!), such is my other self (the peach loving troll )
If you don't feel like spending the time to host a game, that's one thing.
But let's not pretend like these "new rules" are the reason for the game "dying" like this. Your intention with hosting this was 100% political... If it wasn't then why would you even discuss the bold? Just make a slightly less extreme set of rules, and people will join... It's really not that hard... I'm confident you'll find it's in fact quite easy to host with the new rules if you gave them a chance.
But of course it's your choice whether or not to host a game. Tbh, I believe there were a few people excited about this (myself included). I just kinda wish people would put together games without the dramatic bullshit. I liked the Kurumi ruleset I was just in, and even a less restrictive "normal" game with the new rules is fine with me. But when you severely and extremely limit the language people can use, make it modkillable, and then blame the new rules (which don't state anything about limiting language used...), that's a bit much. And it's super-unnecessary. Like if someone started using any of the several racist or homophobic slurs in your list they would be modkilled in either ruleset. And if someone uses rather tame words like "pissed" or "ass" they wouldn't be in trouble in either of the rulesets (new or old).
|
On June 20 2014 14:30 goodkarma wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2014 14:14 Alakaslam wrote:Oh Game is dead. I don't feel like hosting it with all the politics.If foolishness wants another up I could do that too. But since I am bitter it better be a last resort because it would either be ghetto mafia or host WIFOM mafia.Image is incredibly appropriate though, foolishness forsaw this and I gave TL benefit of the doubt Which, Blew Up In My Face As for (ooh I forget her name!), such is my other self (the peach loving troll ) If you don't feel like spending the time to host a game, that's one thing. But let's not pretend like these "new rules" are the reason for the game "dying" like this. Your intention with hosting this was 100% political... If it wasn't then why would you even discuss the bold? Just make a slightly less extreme set of rules, and people will join... It's really not that hard... I'm confident you'll find it's in fact quite easy to host with the new rules if you gave them a chance. But of course it's your choice whether or not to host a game. Tbh, I believe there were a few people excited about this (myself included). I just kinda wish people would put together games without the dramatic bullshit. I liked the Kurumi ruleset I was just in, and even a less restrictive "normal" game with the new rules is fine with me. But when you severely and extremely limit the language people can use, make it modkillable, and then blame the new rules (which don't state anything about limiting language used...), that's a bit much. And it's super-unnecessary. Like if someone started using any of the several racist or homophobic slurs in your list they would be modkilled in either ruleset. And if someone uses rather tame words like "pissed" or "ass" they wouldn't be in trouble in either of the rulesets (new or old).
I didn't blame the new rules. (Actually let me see if I did.) You are right, I effectively did. See *3
Remember I was told by foolishness this was not the direction we were headed. I did this anyway.
The reason I made those Bolded remarks is because they all wouldn't leave this game out of their politics. They politicized it and now it is political, so much so that you now assign that intent to me. So I will likely appease their politic to the same extreme that they accused my game of being. Besides it is just a matter of waiting, have someone else host the other game. I am pointing out that I am not in the emotional shape to create an honest setup atm.
*3The possibility that it might stop all the arguing was a bonus to this idea that drove me to propose it to foolishness now. Initially I wanted to wait for more hosting credibility.
Also, you morons. I never said I would pursue bans for modkills. I only implied it. And the reaction was so obviously ban-related.
And goodkarma why do you fail to see that your very argument with me is proof that this game is honest? This game's theme is a boardroom in the corporate world, which often include all manner of insults such as Coag pointed out but are also home to some extremely censored environments.
Nobody has self control to censor themselves though, I guess.
Weak minds. The gene pool really is weakening, guess I am an example of that too.
|
Proofs positive of my motives and the rushed nature of this game:
No custom banner (even a request for artists to make one on the fly)
OP in progress
Recycling old 13 player Newbie setup BH made versus balancing one of my own suxxu ones with the bamcis 4
If you need more too bad sometimes intent just doesn't shine through more than a bit.
|
Don't get mad when people don't want to join a game with bad rules. That is not their problem, it's your problem.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
I hate to be "that guy" but the original restrictive setup of this game is totally possible under the current, "old" rules. The new rules are not in place, and even if they were, do not require this kind of OP. In fact, for those of you who argued that hosts could each have their own level of strictness and have diversity, this is entirely in the realm of the possible (though perhaps not what you intended). It is worth noting though this kind of setup will be possible in the new system as well, since the new system is almost identical to the old system...
Carry on, friends!
|
On June 20 2014 16:10 Blazinghand wrote: I hate to be "that guy" but the original restrictive setup of this game is totally possible under the current, "old" rules. The new rules are not in place, and even if they were, do not require this kind of OP. In fact, for those of you who argued that hosts could each have their own level of strictness and have diversity, this is entirely in the realm of the possible (though perhaps not what you intended). It is worth noting though this kind of setup will be possible in the new system as well, since the new system is almost identical to the old system...
Carry on, friends!
Then don't be that guy.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On June 20 2014 16:31 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2014 16:10 Blazinghand wrote: I hate to be "that guy" but the original restrictive setup of this game is totally possible under the current, "old" rules. The new rules are not in place, and even if they were, do not require this kind of OP. In fact, for those of you who argued that hosts could each have their own level of strictness and have diversity, this is entirely in the realm of the possible (though perhaps not what you intended). It is worth noting though this kind of setup will be possible in the new system as well, since the new system is almost identical to the old system...
Carry on, friends!
Then don't be that guy.
JK I love being "that guy" because "that guy" is shorthand for "that guy who is right, as always"
|
On June 20 2014 16:33 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2014 16:31 DarthPunk wrote:On June 20 2014 16:10 Blazinghand wrote: I hate to be "that guy" but the original restrictive setup of this game is totally possible under the current, "old" rules. The new rules are not in place, and even if they were, do not require this kind of OP. In fact, for those of you who argued that hosts could each have their own level of strictness and have diversity, this is entirely in the realm of the possible (though perhaps not what you intended). It is worth noting though this kind of setup will be possible in the new system as well, since the new system is almost identical to the old system...
Carry on, friends!
Then don't be that guy. JK I love being "that guy" because "that guy" is shorthand for "that guy who is right, as always"
I used to love you BH. Now I hate you. It sucks.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On June 20 2014 16:50 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2014 16:33 Blazinghand wrote:On June 20 2014 16:31 DarthPunk wrote:On June 20 2014 16:10 Blazinghand wrote: I hate to be "that guy" but the original restrictive setup of this game is totally possible under the current, "old" rules. The new rules are not in place, and even if they were, do not require this kind of OP. In fact, for those of you who argued that hosts could each have their own level of strictness and have diversity, this is entirely in the realm of the possible (though perhaps not what you intended). It is worth noting though this kind of setup will be possible in the new system as well, since the new system is almost identical to the old system...
Carry on, friends!
Then don't be that guy. JK I love being "that guy" because "that guy" is shorthand for "that guy who is right, as always" I used to love you BH. Now I hate you. It sucks.
No you still love me :3
|
|
|
|