/tg/Station 13

this is separate entirely from the other nsfw book/art discussion

we should ban people who write porn about other players in the community and upload it to our servers

it's incredibly fucking creepy to write pornography about random people you know and share it with their associates

it doesn't matter if it's of "their character" because this is ss13 and 9 times out of 10 the player character is just a stand-in for the actual player, and everyone knows that when you're referring to someone's static name character, you're referring to the person behind the static name character.

it's creepy as shit and should be banned regardless of whether we decide to purge the Lusty Xenomorph Maid from the library

If someone makes porn of you, you're free to make a ban request in the usual manner.

What if I consent to it?

Agux909 wrote:What if I consent to it?

Pandarsenic wrote:

Agux909 wrote:What if I consent to it?

me 8==D goofball

Pandarsenic wrote:If someone makes porn of you, you're free to make a ban request in the usual manner.

What year do you think it is, boomer-min?

Can we consent to it and then withdraw consent later as, like, a free ban killswitch?

iamgoofball wrote:

Pandarsenic wrote:If someone makes porn of you, you're free to make a ban request in the usual manner.

What year do you think it is, boomer-min?

2021 where ban requests are sent directly to headmins (a shit system compared to ban requests but the current system nonetheless)

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:

Pandarsenic wrote:If someone makes porn of you, you're free to make a ban request in the usual manner.

What year do you think it is, boomer-min?

2021 where ban requests are sent directly to headmins (a shit system compared to ban requests but the current system nonetheless)

I'm pretty sure it's a shit system on purpose so people get over gripes that admins missed instead of holding onto bad rounds.

iamgoofball wrote:the player character is just a stand-in for the actual player, and everyone knows that when you're referring to someone's static name character, you're referring to the person behind the static name character.

Ban people who think and play like this instead.

Armhulen wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:

Pandarsenic wrote:If someone makes porn of you, you're free to make a ban request in the usual manner.

What year do you think it is, boomer-min?

2021 where ban requests are sent directly to headmins (a shit system compared to ban requests but the current system nonetheless)

I'm pretty sure it's a shit system on purpose so people get over gripes that admins missed instead of holding onto bad rounds.

its a shit system because nobody can be bothered to deal with the drama of public ban requests. ban requests are a lot more private now but literally just making the headmins have to deal with them alone is a terrible system. t. had to deal with that bullshit as a past headmin

but anyways as long as that system is in place like it is currently then yeah you can just use that if you are being harassed through erotic novellas

can I write creepy porn about myself? With the safety sex goliath.

Jonathan Gupta wrote:can I write creepy porn about myself? With the safety sex goliath.

absolutely, but make sure to put a great deal of focus on the safety sex goliath. there's no rule precedent for this, i just think he is a funny character and want more of him

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Jonathan Gupta wrote:can I write creepy porn about myself? With the safety sex goliath.

absolutely, but make sure to put a great deal of focus on the safety sex goliath. there's no rule precedent for this, i just think he is a funny character and want more of him

the safety sex goliath puts on the condoms for his tendrils slowly and putting me inside a full body latex condom, while he does this he says "BE SAFE KIDS!" THE ANAL PO-

sinfulbliss wrote:Can we consent to it and then withdraw consent later as, like, a free ban killswitch?

then you ask the person to delete it, if they refuse, they get yeeted. admins can also delete books

i don't think anyone disagrees with this thread? it'd definitely be disallowed under rule 1, writing smut of someone without their consent is not only disturbing but also being a dick

did anything prompt you to make this policy discussion? I just thought it was a given so i'm confused as to what purpose this serves. asking genuinely

wubli wrote:

sinfulbliss wrote:Can we consent to it and then withdraw consent later as, like, a free ban killswitch?

then you ask the person to delete it, if they refuse, they get yeeted. admins can also delete books

i don't think anyone disagrees with this thread? it'd definitely be disallowed under rule 1, writing smut of someone without their consent is not only disturbing but also being a dick

did anything prompt you to make this policy discussion? I just thought it was a given so i'm confused as to what purpose this serves. asking genuinely

nobody wants to have a smut book with the safety sex goliath anally pounding you(unless you're me). Dunno why he made this thought this wasn't a policy. I thought it was a good thread that I could share some smut of me and the safety sex goliath with?

I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

Did you even read the OP? I explained the issue clearly.

Kryson wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:the player character is just a stand-in for the actual player, and everyone knows that when you're referring to someone's static name character, you're referring to the person behind the static name character.

Ban people who think and play like this instead.

True tbh, those are the people who lose their spaghetti when they lose.

iamgoofball wrote:

Farquaar wrote:snip

Did you even read the OP? I explained the issue clearly.

ok but what issue because you did not respond to my post and this thread looks like a solution looking for a problem
not like ppl writing smut of others without consent has never happened but it's always been bad so i'm not sure what purpose this thread serves if we always discouraged it

iamgoofball wrote:

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

Did you even read the OP? I explained the issue clearly.

I read your OP. The assertion that 90% of staticnames are self-inserts is entirely baseless, and laughable if even close to true. People should not be so invested in their super special OCs- full stop. It fosters bad sportsmanship, poor RP, vindictive IC behaviour, and metagang formation. The last thing this game needs is to open the door to an “original character donut steal” ruleset

Farquaar wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

Did you even read the OP? I explained the issue clearly.

I read your OP. The assertion that 90% of staticnames are self-inserts is entirely baseless, and laughable if even close to true. People should not be so invested in their super special OCs- full stop. It fosters bad sportsmanship, poor RP, vindictive IC behaviour, and metagang formation. The last thing this game needs is to open the door to an “original character donut steal” ruleset

Even if a character isn't a self-insert it's super fucking awkward chief
Nutella isn't a self-insert, I'm not a homeless depressed moth bartender and he's not some gary sue 2d cardboard cutout either
however, all of his words, actions, and thoughts have been written and performed by me (he's not an npc there's someone behind that screen smh) and if I saw porn of the character I'd be pretty fucking weirded out because of that connection that I have with my character after acting as him for 500 rounds




on the other hand feel free to write porn of my human static Ewe Kant I'll just mock you incessantly for it if you cast her as a sub

Only read the title (I do not in any capacity care about whatever self insert / static name drama filler is getting tossed around): this is a far more sane of a solution than blanket suppressing the library.

Writing crappy comedy / satire smut books and using the medium to target / harass / ERP (with literally the greatest amount of effort possible) are completely separate things.

Better than whitewashing everything like we're at some kind of youth morals summer camp run by a narcissistic 2,000 year old vampire that screams when you don't lift your pinky when you drink your morning milky.

Omega_DarkPotato wrote:if I saw porn of the character I'd be pretty fucking weirded out because of that connection that I have with my character after acting as him for 500 rounds

You could use a more good-humoured mindset. I’d laugh if I found R 34 of some stupid character I played on an internet space game. Or any game I’ve played, really. It’s harmless shitposting that doesn’t affect you unless you’re overly attached to your spaceman static OC, in which case I’d remind you not to take SS13 so seriously.

(It’s worth noting that your staticname is not owned by you. Anyone could play a moth named Nutella any time, and no rules would be violated. I could start playing every round as a moth named Nutella, if I wanted.)

Either smut is okay, or it isn’t. There should be zero special metaprotections for staticnames.

Farquaar wrote:It’s harmless shitposting that doesn’t affect you unless you’re overly attached to your spaceman static OC, in which case I’d remind you not to take SS13 so seriously.

This is a nugget of wisdom worth being attached to a great deal of things.

Farquaar wrote:(It’s worth noting that your staticname is not owned by you. Anyone could play a moth named Nutella any time, and no rules would be violated. I could start playing every round as a moth named Nutella, if I wanted.)

This concept came up in bus recently and apparently there is precedent that doing that kind of thing is just generally Rule 1 and admins can tell you to stop.

RaveRadbury wrote:

Farquaar wrote:(It’s worth noting that your staticname is not owned by you. Anyone could play a moth named Nutella any time, and no rules would be violated. I could start playing every round as a moth named Nutella, if I wanted.)

This concept came up in bus recently and apparently there is precedent that doing that kind of thing is just generally Rule 1 and admins can tell you to stop.

If that’s the case, I’d like to see that precedent. If it’s true that violating the sanctity of somebody’s donut steal OC is a rule 1 violation, then there should be a proper policy discussion on the matter and a proper record of said precedent in the written rules.

honestly i'd rather see books gone or books untouched than the inbetween of having to moderate the content of the books

that sounds awful

Armhulen wrote:honestly i'd rather see books gone or books untouched than the inbetween of having to moderate the content of the books

that sounds awful

i'd like to extend my thoughts by saying that in the past 5 years i've probably read less than 10 books, and not even to completion. i can barely get myself to care about all this book discussion because of how little it effects my playing. but if i have to moderate books i will be one unhappy frog i'll tell you that

Armhulen wrote:

Armhulen wrote:honestly i'd rather see books gone or books untouched than the inbetween of having to moderate the content of the books

that sounds awful

i'd like to extend my thoughts by saying that in the past 5 years i've probably read less than 10 books, and not even to completion. i can barely get myself to care about all this book discussion because of how little it effects my playing. but if i have to moderate books i will be one unhappy frog i'll tell you that

With the pacing they can put out someone would have to dedicate so much time to doing this.

Misdoubtful wrote:

Armhulen wrote:

Armhulen wrote:honestly i'd rather see books gone or books untouched than the inbetween of having to moderate the content of the books

that sounds awful

i'd like to extend my thoughts by saying that in the past 5 years i've probably read less than 10 books, and not even to completion. i can barely get myself to care about all this book discussion because of how little it effects my playing. but if i have to moderate books i will be one unhappy frog i'll tell you that

With the pacing they can put out someone would have to dedicate so much time to doing this.

all that trouble for a system NOBODY uses (((((((((((

and remember, i have no takes on books other than having to moderate them because they could poof one day and nothing would change about my ss13 experience. actually i may be for removing them a little because their code is bad, but that can get improved anytime

Armhulen wrote:

Armhulen wrote:honestly i'd rather see books gone or books untouched than the inbetween of having to moderate the content of the books

that sounds awful

i'd like to extend my thoughts by saying that in the past 5 years i've probably read less than 10 books, and not even to completion. i can barely get myself to care about all this book discussion because of how little it effects my playing. but if i have to moderate books i will be one unhappy frog i'll tell you that

Thoroughly cringe take right here.

The common sense way of going about this is that someone can ahelp if they take issue with a sexual portrayal of their character in a book. Admin can then delete the book and let the creator know why it was deleted. Not exactly a grand task for the admins part, is it, and apparently this is already the status quo sooo :shrug:

That being said I def agree with farquuar, ideally people should just stop being piss babies about this shit (saying this as someone who has tolerated a genuinely disgusting copypasta for years now). However we don’t exactly lose much by removing something which makes someone uncomfortable that is targeted towards them specifically. Just write an insulting story about someone if you want your licks i guess

Yeah I totally agree with Wesoda25, this seems like such a simple problem with a simple fix.

Ask player before using them in adult book. If player says no, don't do it. If they do it anyway, player finds out, player ahelps, admins remove the book and ban player for a day for it or something.

sinfulbliss wrote:Yeah I totally agree with Wesoda25, this seems like such a simple problem with a simple fix.

Ask player before using them in adult book. If player says no, don't do it. If they do it anyway, player finds out, player ahelps, admins remove the book and ban player for a day for it or something.

this is a fix, yes

personally i'd be fine with goofball's suggestion or wesoda's suggestion. my interest in the issue is that i don't want to see our oversensitive zoomer admins who have that liberal university mindset remove classic books like wgw, or even classics that involve characters of players who have long since moved on, because some people may be sensitive to theoretical readings of said books.

i don't like think people should have to put up with some weird sex book about their oc that they hate though, even if it's ironic and intended to be humourous. not even sure about people writing nasty non-sexual books about characters they hate either. seems like harassment and it seems like the server's persistent features like the library shouldn't be used as avenues for passive-aggressively promoting hate against particular people for time eternal like that

sinfulbliss wrote:Yeah I totally agree with Wesoda25, this seems like such a simple problem with a simple fix.

Ask player before using them in adult book. If player says no, don't do it. If they do it anyway, player finds out, player ahelps, admins remove the book and ban player for a day for it or something.

Hasn't this always been the case?

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

the fact that you either don't understand why doing this is creepy and bad or do understand and are choosing to ignore it so you can soapbox about "Le CrIngE SanIc OCs exdee" makes you less than a person

cSeal wrote:

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

the fact that you either don't understand why doing this is creepy and bad or do understand and are choosing to ignore it so you can soapbox about "Le CrIngE SanIc OCs exdee" makes you less than a person

Less than a person? I don't even want to write a thought-out retort.

What an utterly nasty and unhinged statement.

huge number of statics in the game that aren't active anymore, how do you decide who gets protection

This is a pretty solid argument for removing smut wholesale. Either we keep it and have to do weird rule bending for the sake of letting people post consensual smut of each other or we just ban it outright.

This is covered very well by Rule 1 already. Adding anything about this to the rules would be pointless bloat.

cSeal wrote:

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

the fact that you either don't understand why doing this is creepy and bad or do understand and are choosing to ignore it so you can soapbox about "Le CrIngE SanIc OCs exdee" makes you less than a person

Wow, pretty interesting take from an admin declaring that someone is subhuman for not agreeing with them in an argument about writing shitty pornography.


classic moff

I can understand why people would feel violated by being inserted into someone's sexual fantasy.

Before we banned ERP we banned people for non consensual ERP, which is words used to force someone into a sexual situation.
This seems similar, just another form

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Armhulen wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

iamgoofball wrote:

Pandarsenic wrote:If someone makes porn of you, you're free to make a ban request in the usual manner.

What year do you think it is, boomer-min?

2021 where ban requests are sent directly to headmins (a shit system compared to ban requests but the current system nonetheless)

I'm pretty sure it's a shit system on purpose so people get over gripes that admins missed instead of holding onto bad rounds.

its a shit system because nobody can be bothered to deal with the drama of public ban requests. ban requests are a lot more private now but literally just making the headmins have to deal with them alone is a terrible system. t. had to deal with that bullshit as a past headmin

but anyways as long as that system is in place like it is currently then yeah you can just use that if you are being harassed through erotic novellas

Bring back the ban request forum but only for serious shit like breaking the server, harassment, this weird guy writing porn about you, etc. Not for "Omg assistant macGrey hit me with a toolbox and my feelings were hurt".

Farquaar wrote:I fail to see why staticnames deserve to be protected in such a fashion. Either writing smut is okay, or it isn’t. Whether or not somebody’s snowflake OC is the subject of said smut shouldn’t be relevant.

No.
You somehow seem to believe this is about protecting your, ahem, "snowflake OC" and not boundaries.
To begin with - why would you write smut about someone who does not want to be part of it? Do you not realize how weird that is, and clearly in bad faith? Be it because they want to piss you off, or because they're horny for your character - it's very fucking weird.
It's disingenuous to expect everyone to completely detach themselves from the character they play, regardless of whether they are fans of roleplaying or OCs. It's beyond me how you fail to see this.
Now, regarding how to verify whether it was consensual or not, that is another topic. But you don't need to be a diehard OC haver to feel weirded out because someone wrote about your character being fucked without your consent.
It's not you - it should never be you, you should never care about your character too much in a game in which they will die horribly countless times. But sexual stuff is very rightfully a sensitive topic - I am glad it does not affect you at all, but please understand it's not the same for everyone and it's not necessarily related to the attachment you have to your character.

Farquaar wrote:You could use a more good-humoured mindset. I’d laugh if I found R 34 of some stupid character I played on an internet space game. Or any game I’ve played, really. It’s harmless shitposting that doesn’t affect you unless you’re overly attached to your spaceman static OC, in which case I’d remind you not to take SS13 so seriously.

This is such, such a terrible attitude to have. It's honestly awful that you are saying people should simply find it funny and it's a clear case of "this doesn't bother me - why should it bother others?", which would be okay as a question, but instead you are trying to impose it on others and refuse to understand why people being weirdly sexual about your character is gross.

it's creepy but at the same time, it's involving a character which isn't real/(shouldn't be your self insert). like just don't walk into library and read the smut written about you lolololol. It's a game so really just treat it like one, ahelp the smut and move on with your erp in dorms 4.
I agree that people who write smut should be banned because smut is cringe

I like you and respect you, Wubli. But your post perfectly illustrates this OC-centric mindset that the rules should not be encouraging

wubli wrote:No.To begin with - why would you write smut about someone who does not want to be part of it?

You are not your character. You don't own your character. Your character is not a stand-in for you as a person, and if it is, you should begin to distance yourself from your OC and develop a healthy detachment from it.

wubli wrote:Do you not realize how weird that is, and clearly in bad faith? Be it because they want to piss you off, or because they're horny for your character - it's very fucking weird.

Weird? Yes. In fact, SS13 as a whole is incredibly weird. It's part of the appeal. But bad faith? Are you seriously suggesting that every single smutbook about characters in SS13 is written with malicious intent? If so, you must be both an oracle and a mindreader.

wubli wrote:It's disingenuous to expect everyone to completely detach themselves from the character they play, regardless of whether they are fans of roleplaying or OCs. It's beyond me how you fail to see this.

We're not children. We're adults who are expected to tell the difference from fantasy and reality. Detaching yourself from your character is a basic requirement for good roleplay.

wubli wrote:Now, regarding how to verify whether it was consensual or not, that is another topic. But you don't need to be a diehard OC haver to feel weirded out because someone wrote about your character being fucked without your consent.
It's not you - it should never be you, you should never care about your character too much in a game in which they will die horribly countless times. But sexual stuff is very rightfully a sensitive topic - I am glad it does not affect you at all, but please understand it's not the same for everyone and it's not necessarily related to the attachment you have to your character.

Wubli, this may appear to be an ad hominem argument, but I promise that it is not. Please look at this graph.

Would you be open to the possibility that your strong reaction to character-based smut is, in part, a result of your strong attachment to your OC? The OC you frequently draw and play ~90% of rounds as? This isn't a blame-game here. You have good intentions. But I think that if you started creating new characters and exploring new avenues of roleplay, you wouldn't feel so strongly about a fictional character potentially being desecrated by scribbles in the library.

Farquaar wrote: Wubli, this may appear to be an ad hominem argument, but I promise that it is not. Please look at this graph.
[snip]
Would you be open to the possibility that your strong reaction to character-based smut is, in part, a result of your strong attachment to your OC? The OC you frequently draw and play ~90% of rounds as? This isn't a blame-game here. You have good intentions. But I think that if you started creating new characters and exploring new avenues of roleplay, you wouldn't feel so strongly about a fictional character potentially being desecrated by scribbles in the library.

Or maybe they just don't want to be considered a fucking coombrain/degenerate because of someone else writing porn about them, mister oblivious.

Quit fucking baiting. It really isn't hard to think of why someone in an online community wouldn't want to be seen that way simply for the crime of playing the same fucking character for whatever reason. This shit could even go beyond someone's character by having this reputation apply to the victim's ckey itself, which you sure as hell can't deflect with "bro, stop playing snowflake oc wtf???" if that happens.

Edit: Shit, any female player probably has even MORE reason to despise this shit since they're actually women. If someone writes crap about them, it very fucking likely isn't just "yeah, I only like the character" unless they had no fucking clue the person is a woman irl.

Ayy Lemoh wrote:

Farquaar wrote: Wubli, this may appear to be an ad hominem argument, but I promise that it is not. Please look at this graph.
[snip]
Would you be open to the possibility that your strong reaction to character-based smut is, in part, a result of your strong attachment to your OC? The OC you frequently draw and play ~90% of rounds as? This isn't a blame-game here. You have good intentions. But I think that if you started creating new characters and exploring new avenues of roleplay, you wouldn't feel so strongly about a fictional character potentially being desecrated by scribbles in the library.

Or maybe they just don't want to be considered a fucking coombrain/degenerate because of someone else writing porn about them, mister oblivious.

Quit fucking baiting. It really isn't hard to think of why someone in an online community wouldn't want to be seen that way simply for the crime of playing the same fucking character for whatever reason. This shit could even go beyond someone's character by having this reputation apply to the victim's ckey itself, which you sure as hell can't deflect with "bro, stop playing snowflake oc wtf???" if that happens.

Edit: Shit, any female player probably has even MORE reason to despise this shit since they're actually women. If someone writes crap about them, it very fucking likely isn't just "yeah, I only like the character" unless they had no fucking clue the person is a woman irl.

also why should a community bend over backwards to accommodate weirdos rather than the people being weirded out by them

like it's not passive, part-of-the-game behaviour like just plain killing them, you have to actively go out of your way to do this