Define OOC in IC.

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.

Moderator: In-Game Head Admins

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Thu May 16, 2019 8:50 pm #494001

I've fallen into a pitfall that only Rule 0 should address. It's one of the drawbacks of the anti-rule-lawyering approach, and I see why it fits.

Doesn't stop me from being angry as all hell though.

So players and admins, what the hell do you define as Ooc in Ic? For me, it'd have to be a term that doesn't logically exist in ss13.

I was also thinking of a way to say, "A term that signifies knowledge of IC events of past rounds." But that also has its pitfalls. Considering we encourage ic knowledge of antagonist items and features, in another ruleset.

What do you guys think? Should this vague rule have more limitations, so the scenario of getting in trouble of one admin but not another has a minimized chance of occurring?

Might provoke anti-rule-lawyering arguments with this one. But I point towards admin shopping, which is also against the rules. As the other end of the stick.


Edit: To summarize why I think this deserves a Policy Discussion. Currently, OOC in IC is literally a more used Rule 0. Pretty big issue huh.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?



User avatar
Jimmius
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 11:00 pm
Byond Username: Jimmius

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Jimmius » Thu May 16, 2019 9:33 pm #494023

is this about not being allowed to say valid in ic again

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Thu May 16, 2019 9:40 pm #494024

That's what sparked my interest in discussing the concept, yes. I don't like to fall into potholes because admins have different standards for what's cool.

We need some clear guidelines. Otherwise, you might as well press the admin who button before making any judgments on what's ok and what's not ok.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
Karp
 
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:54 am
Byond Username: Ambassador Magikarp

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Karp » Thu May 16, 2019 9:52 pm #494025

if what you say sounds like you're playing and talking about a videogame it probably is ooc in ic

if you're spouting off netspeak 1ik3 +hi5 or leetspeaking it's ooc in ic

if you're talking about stuff out of the game in character it's ooc in ic

User avatar
Lazengann
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:26 pm
Byond Username: Lazengann

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Lazengann » Thu May 16, 2019 9:54 pm #494026

OOC in IC stands for "Out Of Character" in "In Character"

Glad I could help!

User avatar
Atlanta-Ned
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 2:11 pm
Byond Username: Atlanta-ned

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Atlanta-Ned » Thu May 16, 2019 9:56 pm #494028

Karp wrote:if what you say sounds like you're playing and talking about a videogame it probably is ooc in ic

if you're spouting off netspeak 1ik3 +hi5 or leetspeaking it's ooc in ic

if you're talking about stuff out of the game in character it's ooc in ic


Anyone who can't understand this should go play on Hippie or wherever we're sending the idiots these days.
Feedback pls (Don't bother though, because I am perfect)
### ListVarEdit by Atlanta-ned: /datum/reagents reagent_list: Water=/obj/item/weapon/gun/energy/alien
IcePacks wrote:>all you have is a taser and the cold realization that you're a haphazard bandaid over a problem that may or may not exist, applied by someone who doesn't know or care enough about their job to do it properly

OOC: Pizzatiger: God damn Atlanta, how are you so fucking smart and charming. It fucking pisses me off how perfect you are

User avatar
Okand37
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:37 pm
Byond Username: Okand37

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Okand37 » Thu May 16, 2019 10:02 pm #494031

Things like the antag token, valid salad, and the no ERP posters are meant to be funny character-break jokes that exist to make fun of their respective examples. This is why we can't have nice things.
Are you being the neighbour Mr. Rogers would've wanted you to be?

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Thu May 16, 2019 10:07 pm #494035

It's been explained to me by admins like this when talking about in-game items. "If used in the context. For example, if you're hitting people with the item the "Ban-Hammer" and go Bwoink. Then you're not actually breaking immersion. Because you're making a joke. If you fall down the hole in reality and look at the singulos code. If you make a comment on how familiar it is. Then you're still not breaking immersion."

Would you say that this is a fair exception?
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
Mickyan
Github User
 
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:59 pm
Byond Username: Mickyan
Github Username: Mickyan

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Mickyan » Thu May 16, 2019 10:12 pm #494038

this is the dumbest policy thread ever
I play as Swanni, the brain-damaged moth.

Be nice to each other.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Thu May 16, 2019 10:14 pm #494040

Ooc in IC is a dumb rule.

It clearly needs to exist for some level of immersion.

But all the power it possesses to the point where you have to wonder which admins don't like which word is weary.

It's like being gibbed.

No one really uses "Gibbed" outside of ss13. It's an ss13 phrase, but depending on which admin is on. If they overhear it, that's a negative remark towards you.

I think we have it flipped around when terms that literally come from ss13 are no-no words.

Seriously, words like "gibbed" and "valid" don't have the same real-world terminology that they do in ss13. It's straight up silly to have them be considered ic in ooc.

Edit: And a last thing. Aren't we being too heavy-handed, by putting certain words that are born from SS13 under scrutiny but ignoring others? We literally have a rule that allows us to have some knowledge of antags and their dealings even without being one. Why is it that terms from interacting with antagonists can you get you bwoinked?

Am I the only one who finds this paradoxical?
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
Jimmius
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 11:00 pm
Byond Username: Jimmius

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Jimmius » Thu May 16, 2019 11:39 pm #494071

yes

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby cedarbridge » Fri May 17, 2019 12:46 am #494138

Shadowflame909 wrote:Ooc in IC is a dumb rule.

It clearly needs to exist for some level of immersion.

But all the power it possesses to the point where you have to wonder which admins don't like which word is weary.

It's like being gibbed.

No one really uses "Gibbed" outside of ss13. It's an ss13 phrase, but depending on which admin is on. If they overhear it, that's a negative remark towards you.

I think we have it flipped around when terms that literally come from ss13 are no-no words.

Seriously, words like "gibbed" and "valid" don't have the same real-world terminology that they do in ss13. It's straight up silly to have them be considered ic in ooc.

Edit: And a last thing. Aren't we being too heavy-handed, by putting certain words that are born from SS13 under scrutiny but ignoring others? We literally have a rule that allows us to have some knowledge of antags and their dealings even without being one. Why is it that terms from interacting with antagonists can you get you bwoinked?

Am I the only one who finds this paradoxical?

Gibbed is a gaming term and has existed since Quake 1. Its not a paradox, you're just overburdening terms while trying to get to a place where you can say "valid" IC. For some reason.

User avatar
teepeepee
 
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:21 am
Byond Username: Teepeepee

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby teepeepee » Fri May 17, 2019 12:53 am #494139

cedarbridge wrote:Gibbed is a gaming term and has existed since Quake 1.

so it is an out if character reference and should be bannable right?

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 12:55 am #494140

I mean, if you think Gibbed is IC.

The fact that "gibbed" comes from video games. Would make another admin who isn't you go, "Video Game Term. Get this OOC in IC nonsense out of here"

OOC in IC is a minefield
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
Malkraz
 
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:20 am
Byond Username: Malkraz

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Malkraz » Fri May 17, 2019 2:16 am #494167

OOC in IC should only be references to SS13 being a game and netspeak.
Image
Franklin Khan says, " Well I know who I'm metagrudging from now on "
Istoprocent: You and Rock Steele definitely metabuddies, proving metacomms will take time but eventually people will figure it out.
Declan Cooper asks, " does rock steel have autism? "
Erik489: Malkraz, I gotta ask, and please be honest. Do you metacomm with Rock Steel?
Lumbermancer: also rock should be killed every round
Willy Willee says, " And he kept spam-tabling me, while his metafriend came over "
ATHATH: Rock Steel, I fucking hate you with a passion. I was alive on the station for less than a minute, you absolute cunt you CREMATING ASSHOLE I GENUINELY *HATE* YOU
Adam Karlsson says, " i just want rock " Shaun McFall says, " you know you'll get harshly punished for this right " Adam Karlsson says, " oh i know "
Aidan Duncan says, " Once again, Rock Steel is the fucking worst person on the station "
Twaticus: malk i hate you why do you ruin everything
Alijah Petrov says, " Actually then, im just gonna start robusting rock steel every time i see him "
Adolph Weinstein says, " I like how we have a wizard onboard, and the only person causing shit is Rock "
[Common] Most Likely Malfunction states, " BORG RETURN TO THE CLONEER AND ISPOSE OF ROCK STEELS BODY. "
Dee Dubya: the fact that Rock Steel hasn't been permabanned is proof enough of how low RP /tg/station really is
hanna banana: Rock Steel pushes me over in game and steals my insuls i get so mad i start screaming

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 2:17 am #494168

Exactly. It's too heavy-handed in its current state. Basically, rule 0 2.0. That'd be perfect and would prevent me from getting bwoinked on stuff admins don't even agree on.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
wesoda25
 
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby wesoda25 » Fri May 17, 2019 3:12 am #494185

Shadow idk why you make this out to be so difficult to understand. Don’t say shit thats OOC.

Perhaps you should PR to remove immersion breaking elements if its really so detrimental.
Spoiler:
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
subject217
Github User
 
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 11:27 pm
Byond Username: Subject217
Github Username: subject217

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby subject217 » Fri May 17, 2019 3:24 am #494186

crawling out of oblivion for a minute to say this

OOC in IC is not a hard rule to understand or follow. Many, many, many people don't have any trouble with it. If you need a metaphor, just think of how you'd talk to your boss, or your parents, if you've ever had either of those. You can get away with a lot more than that, but that's the basic idea.

I don't like to fall into potholes because admins have different standards for what's cool.

That's some tough luck. Nobody is actually paid to admin on the server, and they're certainly not going to bend over backwards for you and play rulebook aficionado to moderate a videogame. If you don't want to fall into potholes maybe you should act more like a model player and less like a person trying to play admin bingo so they can get away with saying "valid", of all things.

Here's another perspective while I'm writing this shitty post. You're playing a character within the videogame universe. Ostensibly, this character has no idea what the fuck "valid" means in normal /tg/ context, because "valid" is referring to the RULES that allow your character's soul or some shit to exist in that universe without being obliterated. So it makes literally zero sense whatsoever for you to run around shouting "x is valid!" or "y is an antag!" or what have you. Hence, the rule. It's literally the most basic roleplaying thing imaginable. If it really bothers you that much you can always go play on Beestation or Hippie Station. There is no reasonable re-interpetation of this rule, it will never be elaborated in a rules lawyer mess, and it's certainly not getting removed, so you'll just have to deal with it like the 500 times this thread has been made before.
thankfully former admin
viewtopic.php?f=27&t=20553

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 3:42 am #494189

You see subject. That'd be a very good argument, if their was a line drawn in the sand. But no, like you said to defeat rule lawyers, you just have to hope admins don't dislike certain words.

So it's still a minefield of a rule.

Edit: You also suggest a solution. Which is to make a word salad to not trigger any sensors. That's pretty silly to do for specific phrases so you don't get bwoinked.

Words I'm arguing for like valid and gibbed honestly shouldn't trigger any mines at all. Since they're just words to replace a sentence with, like Hop or other anagrams.

Doing word salads is much more convoluted. When it could be easier with no harm to immersion.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby cedarbridge » Fri May 17, 2019 4:08 am #494194

This is an entire thead of you pretending not to know what words mean so that you can rules lawyer a rule that everyone else seems to be having an easy enough time understanding.

User avatar
Gigapuddi420
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 8:08 am
Location: Dorms
Byond Username: Gigapuddi420

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Gigapuddi420 » Fri May 17, 2019 4:09 am #494195

You can use the word valid without triggering admins so long as the context for it is appropriate. No admin will bwoink you for something like playing Head of Personnel and requesting 'valid paperwork' or complaining that you won't allow someone into your department because they don't have 'valid identification'. The issue is when someone uses the word 'valid' in a way that references the very ooc concept that Subject is talking about. Most our players don't even have a problem with this and the few times it does come up like people getting bwoinked for saying 'it's revs' without understanding why we don't like it will apologize and carry on when it's explained to them.

For the most part admins are just looking for good faith attempts to keep in character. Admins aren't automatically right and I can think of some cases where they were too sensitive but a cool head to explain your reasoning will often prevail. Yes, we know some of these words are fine and are used in regular conversation but the context of their use matters when it's clear you're talking about a game concept instead of reacting to something that is happening in game as if you were there.
Imperfect catgirl playing a imperfect game.

User avatar
BeeSting12
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:11 am
Location: 'Murica
Byond Username: BeeSting12
Github Username: BeeSting12

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby BeeSting12 » Fri May 17, 2019 4:12 am #494198

nobody wants to sit here and define every single instance of OOC in IC. the worst types are either netspeak or straight up talking like it's a video game, ie "JOHN DOE IS THE ANTAGONIST".

Obviously, gibbing is a gaming term, but it's also an action within the context of ss13 (using the gibber) and can be extended to other ways of getting gibbed. Banning is an OOC thing, but in context of the in-game meme item the banhammer, it's allowed to be used.

ie, "John Doe just banned me with the hammer!" is fine, "I'm gonna get banned for this" is not.

Use common sense pls.
Stickymayhem wrote:you're right!

Edward Sloan, THE LAW
Melanie Flowers, Catgirl
Borgasm, Cyborg
Spoiler:
OOC: Hunterh98: to be fair sloan is one of the, if not the, most robust folks on tg

DEAD: Schlomo Gaskin says, "sloan may be a faggot but he gets the job done"

DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "YOU'RE EVERYWHERE WHERE BAD SHIT IS HAPPENING"
DEAD: Rei Ayanami says, "IT'S ALWAYS FUCKING EDWARD SLOAN"
oranges wrote:Bee sting is honestly the nicest admin, I look forward to seeing him as a headmin one day

Click here to make incoherent rants about my badminning.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 4:55 am #494201

Cedar, Beegamer. If I want this Policy Discussion to go anywhere. Then I need to start changing minds from the top. I will do my best here to try and show you that the current state of OOC in IC's limitless potential because it's a rule with few words, is a big issue. Please look towards these condensed sentences.

The first flaw with OOC in IC in its current state is that it places too much faith in the admin's ability to do no wrong, and avoid rule lawyering themselves. What I mean by this is, we're all human and humans can have VERY different judgment. As seen by all the different responses from all the different admins in this thread. This is more of a flaw with anti-rule lawyering then it is with OOC in IC. But I think with minor changes it could be corrected in this rule. For example, I would like to state precedent with the second sentence in rule 3.

Say you're a cultist, and as your team is new and is quite literally asking for help in cult say. You PDA them a link of the wiki guide. So that they quickly learn the rundown of the mode. You get bwoinked, and the admin tells you not to do that. Because using the wiki as some sort of ic guide. Is immersion breaking.

This is a true precedent that has happened to me whilst following the latter half of OOC in IC. The admin had the rights to do that as even though the wiki is a tool for new players. The rule does not explicitly say, "You can fully break immersion" or "this includes linking to the wiki." It's kind of funny, thinking back on it. But I would just like to reaffirm that, all admins have a different viewing of the rules. So it can really be like stepping on a minefield when trying to skirt around their different viewpoint on vague rules. Which brings me to my next point.

OOC in IC, which should be used to maintain character. Is instead being used to disrupt the fun. We've come about terms like gibbing and valid in their own special meanings. Some admins think the meanings err towards OOC context more than others. Whilst others think there are several levels to it. This entire process is very destabilizing of the gameplay itself.

This is why we have the latter half of rule 2, "Characters are otherwise allowed to know everything about game mechanics or antagonists, as well as keep persistent friendships or relationships with other characters when not for the purpose of unfair advantage by teaming up together for little IC reason. "

It keeps the short-paced /tg/ round flowing, without admins having to get involved and nitpick every little thing when Tider McDaniels finds an Emag and instantly knows how to use it. I feel like if we have precedent like this in the rules, then it'd be much better to attach the same context to a rule like OOC in IC. So Tider McDaniel can use modified versions of Game Terms, to easily communicate what he means without having to a say a whole word salad. To avoid the anti-fun radar!

Lastly, the precedent of OOC in IC encourages the breaking of another rule. What do you mean by that Shadow? Well, I'm not talking about the very direct version of admin shopping labeled in the rules. But instead, a variant, encouraged by other admins. Sorry orange man, but I gotta use you to boost up my argument. "The best way to avoid getting banned is to simply press the AdminWho button."

In our efforts to avoid rule-lawyers. We literally encourage indirect admin-shopping. In an effort to tell which admins are Judge Mcdredd over certain lines, and which aren't.

Wouldn't it be easier to just do, like what Malkraz suggests and make the OOC in IC rule more loose for players instead of admins?

Even though I wasn't there for it. Subject says that this rule issue has come up before, time and time again. Well this roundabout, I think that a simplification of this rule like above to fit the /tg/ style. Would ease up and correct the one flaw of anti-rule lawyering.

Above all. OOC in IC as a concept should never be held to "potentially" such a High RP standard which contrasts with so many of our other more looser and Good-Faith first, guidelines.

Fun first, over immersion. As a wise man once said, "Well-Fed people don't start rebellions."
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby cedarbridge » Fri May 17, 2019 5:04 am #494203

Shadowflame909 wrote:Say you're a cultist, and as your team is new and is quite literally asking for help in cult say. You PDA them a link of the wiki guide. So that they quickly learn the rundown of the mode. You get bwoinked, and the admin tells you not to do that. Because using the wiki as some sort of ic guide. Is immersion breaking.

Name and shame so we can call them dumb or it didn't happen.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 5:07 am #494205

I'm no liar gamer, considering I'm literally trying to good faith you to believe my argument

This incident happened two years ago. So if I remembered the admin's name I would have name-dropped them like I name-dropped orange man.

It was a trial-admin though, def. So yeah, they're deadminned now.

What I mean by this is, I saw them so rarely I forgot the name of said trial admin.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

Tlaltecuhtli
 
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 12:16 am
Byond Username: Tlaltecuhtli

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Tlaltecuhtli » Fri May 17, 2019 5:54 am #494208

ooc in ic:
its revs
hes valid


not ooc in ic
revs
valid

User avatar
CDranzer
 
Joined: Sun May 05, 2019 11:43 am
Byond Username: CDranzer

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby CDranzer » Fri May 17, 2019 6:34 am #494211

I think people are failing to comprehend the core of Shadowflame's complaint, including Shadowflame himself.

The problem is not that "OOC in IC" isn't well defined. It is. It's really clearly defined. It's a simple term with simple components. The problem is that the line between OOC and IC is not clearly defined at the boundary. Usually this isn't a problem, but sometimes you get terms like "valid" where the entire difference between what's IC and what's OOC may come down to the minutia of context. And when it comes down to the minutia of context, it often comes down to admin opinion, and different admins may not agree on what is and isn't a violation. Hell, you might get different opinions from the same admin depending on the time of day or if he's had lunch yet. Shadowflame's right in that there's no clear line, but the thing is, there never can be a clear line with these things. Resolving arbitrary shit like this is what admins are for. And then you get into ban appeals and all that jazz.

Here's the thing, though: It's not that hard to avoid breaking the rules. I'll try and walk you through it.

There's a thing I like to call the "Shitter Gradient". The Shitter Gradient is a sliding scale from complete and total compliance to absolute destructive shittery. At any given time, the gradient will be defined by the admins, and your position on the gradient will be defined by your behavior. As you get closer to the "Maximum Shittery" end of the gradient, the frequency and severity of bwoinks increases. On one end of the scale, you will never get bwoinked. On the other end, you will immediately get shitcanned.

Now a lot of people have trouble comprehending the idea of the gradient. When they get bwoinked, they believe they have crossed what they know as the "Bwoink Threshold". They have crossed a line, and that line-crossing resulted in the bwoink. In response to this, they try to identify the exact position of the Bwoink Threshold on the Shitter Gradient, and aim to stay below that threshold, but generally no lower. Usually, they end up getting bwoinked a second time, and usually it's a more severe bwoink. This often annoys them, because from their perspective they have become less of a shitter, yet now they're being told they've crossed the Bwoink Threshold even further than they did the first time! This is clearly madness, and the result of a corrupt administration. Admin complaints must be filed. Policy threads must be made. Gamers must Rise Up.

What the shitter fails to realize is that the Bwoink Threshold does not exist. It is a creation of his own mind. Being bwoinked for your position on the gradient is like getting cancer from radiation. You're always on the gradient. There's always a risk. Every action you take carries with it a risk of getting bwoinked. Sometimes you may get away with high levels of shittery for an extended period, and sometimes even minor shittery will get you bwoinked. All that changes is that the severity and frequency of the bwoinks increases as you approach Maximum Shittery. If you get bwoinked, the best thing to do is stop, listen to the admin, evaluate your position on the gradient, and adjust your behavior accordingly. It may have been a matter of luck. You may have been hit by a grouchy admin for a minor offense. In that case, perhaps only minor adjustment is needed. But usually, it means you should try to evaluate what it is you're doing that's exposing you to the far end of the gradient, and try to compensate for that behavior.

User avatar
Karp
 
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:54 am
Byond Username: Ambassador Magikarp

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Karp » Fri May 17, 2019 7:39 am #494217

CDranzer wrote:I think people are failing to comprehend the core of Shadowflame's complaint, including Shadowflame himself.

The problem is not that "OOC in IC" isn't well defined. It is. It's really clearly defined. It's a simple term with simple components. The problem is that the line between OOC and IC is not clearly defined at the boundary. Usually this isn't a problem, but sometimes you get terms like "valid" where the entire difference between what's IC and what's OOC may come down to the minutia of context. And when it comes down to the minutia of context, it often comes down to admin opinion, and different admins may not agree on what is and isn't a violation. Hell, you might get different opinions from the same admin depending on the time of day or if he's had lunch yet. Shadowflame's right in that there's no clear line, but the thing is, there never can be a clear line with these things. Resolving arbitrary shit like this is what admins are for. And then you get into ban appeals and all that jazz.

Here's the thing, though: It's not that hard to avoid breaking the rules. I'll try and walk you through it.

There's a thing I like to call the "Shitter Gradient". The Shitter Gradient is a sliding scale from complete and total compliance to absolute destructive shittery. At any given time, the gradient will be defined by the admins, and your position on the gradient will be defined by your behavior. As you get closer to the "Maximum Shittery" end of the gradient, the frequency and severity of bwoinks increases. On one end of the scale, you will never get bwoinked. On the other end, you will immediately get shitcanned.

Now a lot of people have trouble comprehending the idea of the gradient. When they get bwoinked, they believe they have crossed what they know as the "Bwoink Threshold". They have crossed a line, and that line-crossing resulted in the bwoink. In response to this, they try to identify the exact position of the Bwoink Threshold on the Shitter Gradient, and aim to stay below that threshold, but generally no lower. Usually, they end up getting bwoinked a second time, and usually it's a more severe bwoink. This often annoys them, because from their perspective they have become less of a shitter, yet now they're being told they've crossed the Bwoink Threshold even further than they did the first time! This is clearly madness, and the result of a corrupt administration. Admin complaints must be filed. Policy threads must be made. Gamers must Rise Up.

What the shitter fails to realize is that the Bwoink Threshold does not exist. It is a creation of his own mind. Being bwoinked for your position on the gradient is like getting cancer from radiation. You're always on the gradient. There's always a risk. Every action you take carries with it a risk of getting bwoinked. Sometimes you may get away with high levels of shittery for an extended period, and sometimes even minor shittery will get you bwoinked. All that changes is that the severity and frequency of the bwoinks increases as you approach Maximum Shittery. If you get bwoinked, the best thing to do is stop, listen to the admin, evaluate your position on the gradient, and adjust your behavior accordingly. It may have been a matter of luck. You may have been hit by a grouchy admin for a minor offense. In that case, perhaps only minor adjustment is needed. But usually, it means you should try to evaluate what it is you're doing that's exposing you to the far end of the gradient, and try to compensate for that behavior.


if its a single instance the admin is gonna tell you to knock it off, if you accept and act understanding most admins will let you off with that warning for understanding if you're new or its something awkward they wouldn't expect most people to know

the only time you ever get punished for ooc in ic notes is when you get told to stop and you continue repeatedly doing it in future rounds or you don't give a shit/continue doing it after being told to stop

the only ooc in ic bans Ive ever seen are for people with 5+ notes and 15 minute bans telling them to stop while they continue to do it in future rounds or people who literally refuse to stop ooc in ic'ing after being told stop and are warned to stop in the same round

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Arianya » Fri May 17, 2019 8:09 am #494218

If you get bwoinked over OOC in IC and feel it is invalid you are welcome to make a policy discussion or an admin complaint challenging that decision.

If the headmins agree with you then admins in general will know it's not okay. If the headmins disagree with you then you will know it's not "different admin opinions!!" because the headmins are the end of the line as far as rulings go.

This is the way our system is deliberately designed - admins on the scene have a lot of flexibility but can be reigned in by headmins - and you aren't going to change that with this thread.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

User avatar
terranaut
 
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 11:43 pm
Byond Username: Terranaut

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby terranaut » Fri May 17, 2019 10:17 am #494230

if you have to ask or wodner then dont do it
Image

User avatar
teepeepee
 
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:21 am
Byond Username: Teepeepee

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby teepeepee » Fri May 17, 2019 12:40 pm #494234

the short of the message I wish to convey in the following paragraphs is:
the spirit of the rule against OOC in IC should be to prevent netspeak and other forms of nonsensical abbreviations, not a justification for filling your note quota
How do our characters "know" anything about the in-game world around them?
They can:
-See within 7 tiles of them and the contents of screens they interact with
-Examine things to know their name, a short description of them and even things they can't easily see (e.g.: that a security officer has a disabler in his exosuit slot)
-Read books and papers they have in their hands or within one tile
-"Hear" other people speaking, announcements, results of an operation with a machine, the result of a coin flip, PDA messages
-rule 2's "Characters are otherwise allowed to know everything about ingame mechanics or antagonists"
Through these means available to the character we play we could see a food item the chef made, let's say: the "valid salad" (https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Guide_to_food_and_drinks ctrl+f "valid salad"), or a coin that looks different from the others, called the "antag token" (https://tgstation13.org/wiki/Vending_machines#Security in premium items). Furthermore, we can even flip that coin, and more knowledge will flood our character's head, he will know wether the coin landed heads or tails because he will hear "valid" or "salid". Our character can also read a list of threats to the station in the report that is printed roundstart at the bridge, with terms that include "nuclear operative", "traitors" and "revolutionaries" among others.
This is all information accessible to our characters with which we could say:
-"the threat to the station is revolutionaries! just like the report warned!" or "it's revs" for short
-"he is a valid candidate for execution" or "he's valid" for short
-"she is an enemy of the corporation, antagonizing it to prevent it from reaching it's goals!" or "she's an antag" for short
You might argue that shortening it is what's frowned upon, and yet we allow for other shortenings without problem, like "nuke ops" or just "ops" for "nuclear operatives", "HoP" for "Head of personnel", "AI" for "artificial intelligence", "borg" for "cyborg", "tator"/"tater" for "traitor", "ling" for "changeling"
What I see is actually a blacklist of words that will give make an admin's day since they can now note you and quote it as a reason to lengthen your future bans (we've all read "you've gotten x notes in just x months!" before) and a whitelist of words that have been allowed to be said because of player pushback, like "banhammer" and "bwoink" when someone has the banhammer item.
There are multiple OOC references, like the Pwr-game soda, the powercrepe food item, that are peppered around the world are characters develop in, faulting players for daring to use the terms you give access to their characters is just a noob trap that should be removed, the spirit of the OOC in IC rule is to make communication realistic within the setting and not cringey filled with netspeak, not to fuck over players that do things that make sense in the game universe (since your character cannot move while talking, it makes sense that they would shorten their sentences)
Thus, I propose that either the terms we can't use be removed from our character's cognition in the game universe and kept as OOC mechanics, or that you make up a list of what words should not be said, rather than leaving it to the arbitry of the administrators.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 12:41 pm #494235

Alright. So, I guess my brain won't let me go to sleep until I bring out essentially the crux of this argument. So here goes.

Admins and Headmins of /tg/. Rule 3, the OOC in IC rule is inherently petty and plays in an entirely different ballpark, unlike any other rule we have.

To prove this. I would like to just write out an example of the way this rule is enforced on a casual basis.

Person A: Oh god it's revs/ I'm not fucking valid!/ I'm not a ling don't gib me

This situation usually arises from a point of increased crisis on /tg/. A very common theme within the game. You accidentally slip up and use a "bad" word to rapidly explain your thought to others during this time of increasing tension, usually the rising action of the round. If put into a literary sense.

Now here's where it goes awry.

Admin B: -Bwoink- "Person A: Oh god it's revs" Saying its revs is against the rules. Now for this slip-up, I'm gonna have to mark you with a note so you don't say it again.

Seemingly fine here, right? Well, this actually goes against the way literally every other rule handles things.

To explain further, I would like to point out the way other rules operate. Rule 2 for example, requires active intent to break. Malicious or otherwise. Rule 5. It's the opposite here but, it's under the same standard. You literally have to put in "Effort" as a head of staff member and this rule won't be broken.

This is, in fact, the worst unintentional act of malice rule 3 does. It punishes those without any malicious intent.

Now, going back to my example here for a short bit. Admins reading this might no longer get what I mean, as when you're an admin you become desensitized to stuff that used to punish you. Since you're the ones handing them out now. But even though it may not seem like it, getting a Note is actually a punishment to the player.

You may not want it to be viewed that way, but I and Johnny greens both know that your mood after getting a note is literally in the garbage. You're depressed, and you'll be like that on the future rounds of ss13. For at least the rest of the day. So I would like to empathize here, to the players. It is a punishment. If I could find the headmin ruling to state precedent to this but, it's just the same way that an admin telling you to do something over a bwoink is more then a guideline to the players. It's a task with a "Or else" behind it that admins may no longer see.

Now to wrap this up. OOC in IC preys on the literal innocent. There's no malicious intent involved, no grief. Just a player who, like in a Christian family for example. Accidentally said a curse word he learned from school and is now grounded.

It's the only rule that I can so far think of, that actually punishes people for making clear mistakes. At least, ones with no set-up.

So Headmins and Admins, I think this is a fine last closure to my argument against IC in OOC. If this doesn't make you think twice, then there's nothing more for me to say. Because you really see no wrong in it.

I leave the case up to you. If it were me though, I'd tone down the vague design of IC in OOC. In its current state, it's nothing more than a stun baton set on harm. A "gotcha" moment to literally the non-shitter. Honestly, I think the way it's currently enforced even basically breaks the current headmin teams standards on slurs and curse words. Because if you replaced OOC in IC with "Racial-Slurs" or "Curse Words". The enforcement of it would stay the same.

Let's make OOC in IC less Judge Dredd, and have it fit with /tg/. No more punishments over simple slips of the tongue. Punish only when someone is actively making an effort to break the immersion of the game.

That's all I'm saying.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
Shaps-cloud
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2014 4:25 am
Byond Username: Shaps

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shaps-cloud » Fri May 17, 2019 1:08 pm #494238

Lazengann wrote:OOC in IC stands for "Out Of Character" in "In Character"

Glad I could help!
P.S. Shoot Dr. Allen on sight and dissolve his body in acid. Don't burn it.

Image

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Arianya » Fri May 17, 2019 1:29 pm #494243

No one gets punished for slipping up once in a blue moon.

At worst you get noted so we can see if its a pattern of behaviour or a once in a blue moon misbehaviour.

And I'll say, as I've said for a long time.

Notes are not a punishment.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

User avatar
teepeepee
 
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:21 am
Byond Username: Teepeepee

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby teepeepee » Fri May 17, 2019 1:38 pm #494245

Arianya wrote:No one gets punished for slipping up once in a blue moon.

At worst you get noted so we can see if its a pattern of behaviour or a once in a blue moon misbehaviour.

And I'll say, as I've said for a long time.

Notes are not a punishment.

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=17568&p=409606&hilit=notes+punishment#p409606
this was said to you by a previous headmin and I still feel like it has merit
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=13296&p=344451&hilit=notes+punishment&sid=100ae1d29d28351af2c258a50bb4ffe5#p344607
this was posted in that same thread I linked

User avatar
imsxz
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:27 pm
Byond Username: Imsxz

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby imsxz » Fri May 17, 2019 1:47 pm #494248

please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this policy thread.
Image

please subscribe to me on youtube

terranaut wrote:i saw this video before it was posted here
you too can be cool like me if you just subscribe to imsxz youtube channel :shades:



Arianya wrote:no, not the snails, shut up imsxz


Nervore wrote:I am going to will you out of existence, Imsxz.
One day, you will just cease to exist.


Image

User avatar
Gigapuddi420
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 8:08 am
Location: Dorms
Byond Username: Gigapuddi420

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Gigapuddi420 » Fri May 17, 2019 2:24 pm #494256

You're splitting hairs over something that usually just ends in a note and if they continue to make the same mistake over and over results in a short 15 minute kick. The only people who get to serious time over OOC in IC are the ones who seriously breach the rule constantly and our players would really rather we deal with those because they want some level of immersion. The fact people rarely OOC in IC with malicious intent is why we often just go with a note. In of itself the note is harmless, no one cares about a OOC in IC note unless you're accumulating lots of them. If you strongly disagree with the admin's ruling on OOC in IC we have a appeals process where you can bring the whole thing to light and ultimately see if the headmin team agrees with you or not. We've seen some successful appeals in this regard because as you pointed out admins aren't perfect but even those appealed notes are pretty minor in the grand scheme of a players standing in the community. OOC in IC is just admins enforcing the bare minimum role-playing standard we have set for ourselves as a community.

Shadowflame909 wrote:The first flaw with OOC in IC in its current state is that it places too much faith in the admin's ability to do no wrong, and avoid rule lawyering themselves. What I mean by this is, we're all human and humans can have VERY different judgment. As seen by all the different responses from all the different admins in this thread.

I can't see anything admins have said in this thread that contradicts other admins; generally they all seem to have the same idea of what OOC in IC is.

None of the admin responses in this thread have actually disagreed or contradicted one another. The idea of OOC in IC is fairly well defined and at worst the fringe cases include mechanics that we allow as a exception to the rule. You complain about people getting notes for a non-malicious infraction but notes are ultimately just a record that an admin intervened. I'm not going to disagree that notes often work double as a form of punishment, it's just in regards to OOC in IC they really do just work as a record of admin intervention.
Imperfect catgirl playing a imperfect game.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 2:33 pm #494258

Agree to disagree.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
Qbmax32
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:05 am
Location: somewhere
Byond Username: Qbmax32
Github Username: qbmax32

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Qbmax32 » Fri May 17, 2019 2:36 pm #494261

This is a lot of words so shadow can have his god given gamer right to say “valid” returned to him
my admin feedback thread


epic gamer quote compilation
Spoiler:
datorangebottle wrote:what, not having to act like customer service in a volunteer customer service position?

Here's a rebuttal: you're literally in a customer service slash celebrity position. Volunteer or not.

Malkraz wrote:can you stop posting this shit

Nalzul wrote:Fuck Blob (can you imagine how hot it would be to be gangbanged by a bunch of blobbernauts, the blob, and spores)

Wyzack wrote:qbmax your pathetic display of abhorrent burgercraft has brought shame onto the omnivores

Plapatin wrote:i AM the senate

BONERMASTER wrote:I am a big thinker, and it would only be logical if my character had a big head as well. And glasses. Because only people that think, wear glasses.

feem wrote:i tried to send canisters of urine to the station but ended up turning all oxygen into urine and breaking lavaland and also breathing

Anonmare wrote:Each post in this thread can't settle on what it wants to be, but yet, each one is more cursed than the last.

Beesting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.

Vile Beggar wrote:i don't like this thread

imsxz wrote:nervore

FantasticFwoosh wrote:I will whisper sweet nothings that will confuse and perhaps scare you a little, but enhance the experience no-less.

afelinidisfinetoo wrote:By the way, the person who posted that catgirl porn on the github page was me. If anyone wants my private stash just PM me

Nervere wrote:Anything for a femoid.....

Qbopper wrote:I'm a dumb poopy butthead

CitrusGender wrote:god i love it when people feed me my own fried legs

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 2:51 pm #494267

Well none of the admins agree. All of that precedent stating was pointless. I could continue trying to respond and argue. Yet that'd also be pointless.

Doesn't anyone see that OOC in IC is just mean and petty!!!!!
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
SaveVatznick
 
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:40 am
Byond Username: SaveVatznick

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby SaveVatznick » Fri May 17, 2019 3:47 pm #494271

Are you just pretending to be a moron so people have something to read on the toilet, or do you actually have trouble understanding that no OOC in IC means no OOC in IC? If someone accidentally slips up, admins understand that it happens sometimes. If someone continually slips up, they'll be warned, noted, and so on. There are no admin nazis who are going to smite you for helping a new player or going to slap you with a weekban for accidentally typing lol. If you are consistently a problem admins will seek to fix you being a problem. I don't see how that is unfair.

What is up with your posts about enforcement of OOC in IC, too? Being ignorant if the rules doesn't make you immune to them,and being noted about it means you are enough of a problem that admins have started paying attention -in other words, just like any other rule. If you really think not being able to type "Valid" or "KOS G. Melons" is some kind of injustice, I don't know what to say. Are you mad that TG hasn't embraced the final steps to becoming TTTstation?

Quit complaining that you have to put in the bare minimum amount of effort required to maintain the thin pretense of roleplay remaining on the server.
Leora Fleebish is every bad part of me stuffed into a 32x32 sprite.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 4:33 pm #494278

Don't throw mudballs at me. I have very good reason to have issues with OOC in IC. I've stated precedent and my argument is literally being retorted against with 'This rule is too minor to get angry about."

Well guess what, I've been done dirty thanks to this rule. It's time for change. Be sure to insert an insult here towards yourself. You can think of your flaws better then I can.

Speaking of flawed things...
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
teepeepee
 
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:21 am
Byond Username: Teepeepee

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby teepeepee » Fri May 17, 2019 5:18 pm #494289

SaveVatznick wrote:Are you just pretending to be a moron so people have something to read on the toilet, or do you actually have trouble understanding that no OOC in IC means no OOC in IC? If someone accidentally slips up, admins understand that it happens sometimes. If someone continually slips up, they'll be warned, noted, and so on. There are no admin nazis who are going to smite you for helping a new player or going to slap you with a weekban for accidentally typing lol. If you are consistently a problem admins will seek to fix you being a problem. I don't see how that is unfair.

What is up with your posts about enforcement of OOC in IC, too? Being ignorant if the rules doesn't make you immune to them,and being noted about it means you are enough of a problem that admins have started paying attention -in other words, just like any other rule. If you really think not being able to type "Valid" or "KOS G. Melons" is some kind of injustice, I don't know what to say. Are you mad that TG hasn't embraced the final steps to becoming TTTstation?

Quit complaining that you have to put in the bare minimum amount of effort required to maintain the thin pretense of roleplay remaining on the server.

how is it ooc to use terms you can readily find while interacting ICly?
I specifically said netspeak isn't what I'm trying to defend, I don't think the other guy is defending netspeak either, so I don't see why you use "lol" as an example
the injustice is players being noted by admins for doing things that are not obviously rule-breaking, because they're not always ready to be bwoinked and defend themselves with the arguments I've put forward
what I asked is for rule 3 to be ammended or the removal of OOC references from the game, because they are just banbait and serve no other purpouse

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Arianya » Fri May 17, 2019 5:23 pm #494291

teepeepee wrote:
Arianya wrote:No one gets punished for slipping up once in a blue moon.

At worst you get noted so we can see if its a pattern of behaviour or a once in a blue moon misbehaviour.

And I'll say, as I've said for a long time.

Notes are not a punishment.

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=17568&p=409606&hilit=notes+punishment#p409606
this was said to you by a previous headmin and I still feel like it has merit
viewtopic.php?f=33&t=13296&p=344451&hilit=notes+punishment&sid=100ae1d29d28351af2c258a50bb4ffe5#p344607
this was posted in that same thread I linked


This is a fair point but you should also consider this very relevant quote from a previous headmin:

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=22658#p494243
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby cedarbridge » Fri May 17, 2019 5:43 pm #494295

teepeepee wrote:
SaveVatznick wrote:Are you just pretending to be a moron so people have something to read on the toilet, or do you actually have trouble understanding that no OOC in IC means no OOC in IC? If someone accidentally slips up, admins understand that it happens sometimes. If someone continually slips up, they'll be warned, noted, and so on. There are no admin nazis who are going to smite you for helping a new player or going to slap you with a weekban for accidentally typing lol. If you are consistently a problem admins will seek to fix you being a problem. I don't see how that is unfair.

What is up with your posts about enforcement of OOC in IC, too? Being ignorant if the rules doesn't make you immune to them,and being noted about it means you are enough of a problem that admins have started paying attention -in other words, just like any other rule. If you really think not being able to type "Valid" or "KOS G. Melons" is some kind of injustice, I don't know what to say. Are you mad that TG hasn't embraced the final steps to becoming TTTstation?

Quit complaining that you have to put in the bare minimum amount of effort required to maintain the thin pretense of roleplay remaining on the server.

how is it ooc to use terms you can readily find while interacting ICly?
I specifically said netspeak isn't what I'm trying to defend, I don't think the other guy is defending netspeak either, so I don't see why you use "lol" as an example
the injustice is players being noted by admins for doing things that are not obviously rule-breaking, because they're not always ready to be bwoinked and defend themselves with the arguments I've put forward
what I asked is for rule 3 to be ammended or the removal of OOC references from the game, because they are just banbait and serve no other purpouse


Point to a single person banned from the server for making direct reference to an in-game item.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 5:45 pm #494297

Me.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby cedarbridge » Fri May 17, 2019 5:52 pm #494300

Shadowflame909 wrote:Me.

I said banned for directly referencing an item, not for saying a word contained on an item.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 5:53 pm #494301

The items used in literally the same context though. If your an antagonist your valid
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby cedarbridge » Fri May 17, 2019 6:01 pm #494302

Shadowflame909 wrote:The items used in literally the same context though. If your an antagonist your valid

This is where you started this thread and it was wrong then too.

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Define OOC in IC.

Postby Shadowflame909 » Fri May 17, 2019 6:07 pm #494303

You can't be wrong if no one tells you why.
ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

Next

Return to Policy Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deedubya