Obviously, receipts are handy but they’re not a requirement. And I’d (speaking only for myself, though with a polite nod in the direction of that Admin tag) rather not make posting every shred of evidence possible the expectation here.

@Jumpscare said in Star Wars Age of Alliances: Hadrix and Cujo:

That means that since the birth of BMD, no other game has negatively affected MU* players as broadly or as painfully as Star Wars: Age of Alliances.

A board of women, queers, and allies reacting strongly against sexual misconduct and anti-reporting prejudice… Isn’t that how we started in the first place?

For posterity, I present thus:

Tracy is a man and he is a very hansome and manly man.He likes women a lot and women like him too but men think he is compitishion.He has very long brown shiny hair everywhere and a little blue eyes that are mostly green but very hansome anywya.You can tell a lot of things from his eyes.He has a very big bulge in his jeans where the dick would be and it is not a sock because it makes all women almost orgasm with desire.Behind him is a very firm muscled ass that makes you want to slap it and play with it in lots of ways but only if your a women.If you are a man you will die if you touch it because Tracy is strong and very not Gay.If you are a women he winks and smiles at you and thinks you have a nice personality.If you are a man again he frowns at you and it makes you not hit on him or on any women when hes here.He likes lots of women very much and likes very few men but not as boyfriends.And he has a shitr which is nice and blue.I mean shirt sorry.

@hobos said in Bannings:

From what I’ve seen, you are a people with boundless empathy, but you choose who to direct that towards.

Not to really engage in the debate, here, but that’s literally the same as everyone else.

Me. I’m a good thing about mushing.

And this isn’t a throw away joke, or an ego thing, or whatever. But I’ve finally been able to arrive at the conclusion that yes, my RP is good. My events are good. My being present on a game is good. And I’m finally free to feel that I am good enough.

So there. Me. I’m a good thing about mushing.

So obviously it’s a very dark time, horrid things incoming and so forth…

But did anyone actually have The Onion buying Infowars on their 2024 bingo cards?

@Warma-Sheen said in Los Angeles 2043: A Blade Runner MUSH - Discussion:

Just because you can open a game on your own doesn’t mean you should.

You should. It might last, it might not, but at least stuff’s being made even for a moment.

@GF We’re for taco Tuesdays, no-pants Fridays, and the violent and utter overthrow of the capitalistic, white-supremacist patriarchy. And tea.

@CuriousGamer said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:

@Tez There seems to be a few bad actor threads now, would it make sense to put them into their own ‘Bad Actor’ kind of topic at this point? I know there’s been a couple discussions of others in the not too distant past as well.

No. We don’t need a whole section of the forum devoted to talking shit about specific people.

@untitled said in Underage Players:

because I’d be unhappy if I found out my kids were

That right there is the ultimate point. Policing children is the job of the parent, not any game they would seek to join.

Establish rules that state, outright, that the game is for adults, will contain adult themes, etc. If it is revealed from a trustworthy source that there is an underage person, remove them. That is all you can do.

These days, children on these kinds of games are very much the exception. There’s a high barrier to entry and far more free-to-play games around than there were in the early years when a lot of us first started. So don’t stress over it too much.

@Kestrel said in MU Peeves Thread:

There are apps that can detect with relative accuracy whether something is AI-written or not.

I am aware. They’re often crap.

@Third-Eye I wonder how long it’ll be before staff start requiring people defend their applications like one does with a dissertation, just to weed out those who wrote their backgrounds with an LLM.

It sounds like that information will be in the database somewhere anyway, so if one really wants to use it, one can presumably whip up some code to do so.

That said, I can entirely understand someone coming from the perspective of “how will these bastards break/abuse this feature?”

@Faraday said in Blocking Players:

Not letting someone get a word in edgewise is not generally a bannable offense or anything

Well maybe it should be!

But still, I’m only suggesting that it could add context/further information to a complaint situation.

@Faraday said in Blocking Players:

I don’t quite follow this example.

[Conversation Happens]
Pavel blocks Faraday.
Pavel unblocks Faraday.
Pavel: AND ANOTHER THING…
Pavel blocks Faraday.

@Faraday said in Blocking Players:

or had a bad experience with me back in 2006

It’s true, i still curse you for doing thing at place with people.

The only real purpose I can see for staff needing block information is in those situations where a complainant is weird and does the unblock-final retort-block thing. So perhaps it could be included in the report staff get sent when someone reports pages?

@MisterBoring said in Blocking Players:

Should staff be able to see information related to blocking, such as a list of blocks?

That… is a damn good question. Yesterday, I was thinking about it as part of this conversation, but I couldn’t settle my mind on the idea one way or the other. I’m usually in favour of providing staff more information rather than less, but Ares definitely seems to lean more towards ‘no more information than is strictly necessary.’ So while I might prefer that staff have said information, I think it goes against the overall design philosophy.

Perhaps it should be a configurable option? I don’t know, I’ve not tried setting up Ares to fiddle with it, even though I keep meaning to. I can’t make my Victorian vampire game if I don’t fiddle.

So you can please some of the people some of the time…

@Roz said in Blocking Players:

@Pavel said in Blocking Players:

@Roz said in Blocking Players:

@Pavel said in Blocking Players:

In the case of forum and/or channel blocks, a feature I would recommend would be something akin to how these forums work (or at least MSB used to work, I haven’t used the feature in some time): One is alerted to the blocked person posting something, but not what they’ve said unless one clicks through to see what they’ve written. This would only work on the portal, though, so I’m not sure if that’s something you’re of a mind to implement even if it’s possible.

I would disagree with this in the case of a channel mute: if I’m muting someone because they are just so chattery or I’m BEC about them, the last thing I want is a stream of notifications about them talking.

While a fair concern, I think it’s the only design choice that makes sense given the conversational nature of channels. Not everyone will be okay with constantly missing context, or not understanding what people are responding to, etc.

Idk my feeling to that is…they just shouldn’t mute, in that case? LIke, that’s just part of gagging someone on channel. It’s how the functionality worked on older codebases.

From what I recall, there were no built-in channel blocks in older codebases, so it depended on whatever softcode people wrote up. And most games didn’t bother to have any.

Regardless, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest more options over fewer. Especially if the alternative is “just put up with it.”

@Roz said in Blocking Players:

@Pavel said in Blocking Players:

In the case of forum and/or channel blocks, a feature I would recommend would be something akin to how these forums work (or at least MSB used to work, I haven’t used the feature in some time): One is alerted to the blocked person posting something, but not what they’ve said unless one clicks through to see what they’ve written. This would only work on the portal, though, so I’m not sure if that’s something you’re of a mind to implement even if it’s possible.

I would disagree with this in the case of a channel mute: if I’m muting someone because they are just so chattery or I’m BEC about them, the last thing I want is a stream of notifications about them talking.

While a fair concern, I think it’s the only design choice that makes sense given the conversational nature of channels. Not everyone will be okay with constantly missing context, or not understanding what people are responding to, etc.

ETA: Though perhaps a difference between muting and blocking? So if you’re absolutely sure you 100% don’t want to hear from this person, you can block them on channels. With muting being more akin to Discord’s solution.