/tg/Station 13

poorly written and encourages admin overreach

refocus it to explicitly be banning ERP between players

Agreed, Rule 8 is a terrible middle ground which only serves to tempt ban-happy admins to pass out flimsy bans. Either ban all RP or allow all RP. This gray area of ERP-RP will get many innocent Manuelites removed from TG. I have a theory that this rule was only made to quell Manuel's vibrant and diverse culture. Once I was validhunting cultists in dorms, and an admin had a GALL to bwoink me because I took a short detour to spew a few paragraphs at a catgirl in dorms 4. I have appealed the note 7 times and each time I get an answer summing up to "Sorry sicko, rule 8 and all!". Well guess what? Rule 8 is poorly worded, and a RP words ban would do a better job than a ban on this so called 'ERP'

Just for the sake of having it here-

Erotic/creepy stuff is not allowed.
No form of erotic roleplay is allowed on the servers, including things that could be construed as sexual by unwilling participants.

I'm of the opinion that creepy could be dropped from this altogether and have no impact on how effectively the rule communicates what type of behavior isn't acceptable.

ArcaneDefence wrote:Just for the sake of having it here-

Erotic/creepy stuff is not allowed.
No form of erotic roleplay is allowed on the servers, including things that could be construed as sexual by unwilling participants.

I'm of the opinion that creepy could be dropped from this altogether and have no impact on how effectively the rule communicates what type of behavior isn't acceptable.

Someone watching you from maint could be considered creepy. Like why's that guy there, what's he doing, I'm feeling creeped out.

The word creepy doesn't really carry much weight, its a feeling of unpleasantness and unease, in a game where those things just exist.

Erotic covers all the bases on its own without creepy being attached, right? Maybe the intended term is perversion or something.

I assume creepy is someone like, asking for your underwear or something

Still sexual covers it, so I think we're safe dropping that word alone

Yeah sure honestly. If someone's doing something truly bad like kidnapping and trying to do sexual things to people in maint then we can still bonk them for it. TG is not an attractive server for ERP and I doubt that relaxing this rule will cause much trouble. Removing it entirely might cause problems, but we'll see.

Sounds better tbh, ban wise it would mostly stay the same but would disallow more edge cases from happening. Creepy should be taken in a sexual manner I think, which the current rules implies but doesn’t explicitly state, so wouldn’t hurt from it being reworded.

I've run into some shit has creeped me the fuck out that isn't necessarily explicitly ERP but was downright fucking disturbing and not too far off from being sexual, which is the stuff rule 8 definitely keeps away from the server. We had a rule 8 ban very recently that covers this somewhat as an example.

I think rule 8 covers enough gray area to let an admin be able to make sound judgements on what falls under it, and it is explicit enough that ERP isn't allowed. It's removal will probably invite more trouble than what it prevents.

oranges wrote:poorly written and encourages admin overreach
refocus it to explicitly be banning ERP between players

Yeah, this rule seems "too loose".

A player "MEing" something about the character farting on someone else's face, peeing over, shitting, etc... would be totally eschatological, may cause grief and isn't sexual/eroticism. (And if it's creepy is open to interpretation. Is it "creepy"? Most woudln't necessarily think it is.)

Another "MEing" that their character look possessed or speaking an absurdity like that "they are Cthulhu's acolyte, they do eat brains every day and that they do must murder the entire crew" would be totally creepy by the very definition of the word.
But would it fall under this rule?

Then someone else is "MEing" their character is kissing someone else, or they do speak about being in love, ...
Or let's say we have two players with characters who are going for the chaplain to marry them.
Is this sort of thing to fall under this rule?

Interpretations are problematic.

this is a joke thread about rule 11 for people who havent noticed

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:this is a joke thread about rule 11 for people who havent noticed

*me shamefully taps backspace as entire chapters disappear under the cursor

it's not a joke, kind of embarrassing you would think that.

Keep it as is. NecromancerAnne summed it up pretty well. I haven't seen any overreaching cases, could you post examples of cases where you believe admins where overreaching?

I've had exactly one time I've had to use and justify the use of rule 8, and in doing so I felt like the wording to rule 8 was beneficial.

Specifically, a player was harassing another player who ahelped over the situation, stalking them with a camera as a non-antag with a camera console. One time a person walked past them and they PDA'd the harassed player saying that "I had that guy steal some of your hair". Claiming that they're going to watch them sleep and take blood samples from them, really gross personal conduct.

Explicitly blocking Sexual content is the intent of the goal, and I think we can all agree we don't want the server to be a gross sex pit. However, also blocking what I could best describe as "Creepy Fetish Shit" is also a useful extension of this rule. It might just work as an anti-harassment measure when someone's intentionally acting like a pest, but making that clearer in the rules as written is a fair objective.

That falls under rule 1

If every rule 8 discussion thread is taken as a joke there can be no meaningful discussion on rule 8 so from here on out regardless of whether you think it's a real discussion or not let's treat it like one for the sake of discussing policy

This was a joke thread?

If we remove that, we need to re-write the rule in a way that more reflects what we consider to be creepy. Just removing the creepy part really neuters our ability to handle weirdos that toe the line.

Changing it would be a concern if we'd ever seen it misused or any cases of overreaching. Nobody seems to be able to provide examples.

It seems like what no creepy stuff is supposed to mean is "don't make it weird, don't be creepy, don't toe the line with sexual shit, understand the difference between jokes like the AI spamming 'moth feet' on vox and being a creepy motherfucker by going to all the moths in your department with a camera and asking for feet pics from them, etc."

And it seems like it's pretty reliably enforced as such and hasn't caused any real problems?

Vekter wrote:If we remove that, we need to re-write the rule in a way that more reflects what we consider to be creepy. Just removing the creepy part really neuters our ability to handle weirdos that toe the line.

Rule 7 exists.