@Ashkuri said in MU Peeves Thread:
Why is there a concern with “we have to be fair” to people who are toxic to staff and other players, totally obnoxious, or otherwise a bad fit?
Every day I am grateful that the community has shifted away from this batshit behavior. IF THE VIBES ARE RANCID, BYE BYE.
Now that I know the kids say ‘faceclaim’ instead of ‘playedby’, I found a few other sources thanks to KB setting me on the right path:
Shout out to this one for period appropriate pbs:
I guess I should say fcs now, but y’all will think I mean feature characters instead.
@MisterBoring That’s an interesting point. There do exist models for SD that are fed on images in public domain, but I’m curious how well they really hold up because of the sorts of examples you mention.
@bear_necessities said in AI PBs:
I’m thoroughly confused by what the argument is at this point. Is it ok to use AI as long as i acknowledge it’s harmful to artists?
It’s okay to use AI. Maybe it’s not perfect, but fuck it. I use AI, but I acknowledge the technology has some real flaws, and I don’t try to pretend that it is ethically better than alternatives. I’ve used AI for images and AI for code. I’ve even used AI to help me figure out why an update failed for BMD, so abandon ship if that’s a problem!!
I use it. I do sometimes think about whether I should buy carbon credits or something to feel like I use it ethically, but on the other hand, I don’t worry about the carbon credits I burn playing video games. I don’t know. On my fucks given scale, it doesn’t really rate, but it does sometimes itch.
In this discussion, I find the approach that AI PBs are ethically preferable to using PBs of existing persons hard to swallow.
What is the line of thinking? Many of these models have used those very same images in their training data. Like, you’re just using the exact same images with an extra layer of ‘and also other copyrighted works’, in a way that is still very much under debate for how much actual harm it causes.
Then there are some harmful beliefs out there which make people blind to potential issues:
Secondly, if the model is made for a for-profit system like Midjourney, then they already have the requisite rights and permissions. That’s part of what you’re paying for when you buy a license for Midjourney.
That’s just incorrect. Make your judgments on the matter based on fact, at least.
Agree w/ Faraday and Roz. We live in a world that forces us to make choices and compromise every day of our lives to try to do the most good, or at least the least harm, all while knowing that there are vast organizations constantly enacting destruction on scales we could never reach. We are only human and we have to live. We will never be perfect.
But at least make those choices with open eyes.
I do this. It was a huge inconvenience at first, as it’s really hard to find anything for sale online not through Amazon. Like, I’ve even bought things off Etsy that turned out to just be repackaged Amazon stuff.
Not to hugely sidetrack this thread, but I am also an Amazon boycotter. Most of the things you find on Amazon AND on Etsy can usually be found on Ali Express and other similar places because they all come from various dropshippers overseas. When that’s the case, I usually go straight to AE. I find it really exasperating how hard it can be to find legit products on Etsy sometimes.
@Aria lmfao ty I’ll look. At the hair transplant costs, I mean.
Serves me right for seeing what would happen if I lifted the registration freeze.
Forked out the AI PB discussion to try to keep resources in the other thread, discussion here.
@helvetica I used to use Pinterest (especially Roz’s pinterest collection) a lot but I’ve had issues running into unending unmarked but obviously AI images.
@KarmaBum THANK U. I need more resources like that.
If you aren’t a coder, I would get familiar with what Ares and FS3 can provide as a base and work with your game from there. The less you have to code, the faster you will be able to move.
@real_mirage said in World Tone / Feeling:
Also I want a Grimbright/Nobledark sci-fi/fantasy with mechs and lords and ladies and dragons.
Because I am like 14 and hate having to work and laying taxes.
Funny enough I know someone working on a game that could fit that whole-ass description.
ETA: Not me. I’m not working on this. I’m not being coy about me working on this. IT’S NOT ME.
@Faraday said in Player Ratios:
Just look at why +vote/+nom systems fell out of favor. I even stopped using the completely useless (nothing but a public ‘attaboy’) +cookies on my games because of the complaints about so-and-so always getting all the scenes, or cookie-voting circles, or people feeling bad that they never made the leaderboard, or whatever. (There’s a reason they’re a plugin on Ares and not standard in the core code.)
Speaking as one of the people who can sometimes feel kind of terrible in the world of public cookies, public <3s, and public votes, thank you for making this change. It was never rational on my part, but it feels better to me when there isn’t a leaderboard to chase.
That’s been the case for me a lot, actually, when faced with leaderboard systems. Arx had its modeling leaderboard. It was really fun to do big modeling and have big numbers. But with leaderboards it can always feel like there’s an insurmountable lead, too. I don’t know. There’s always some real fucking +/- with those systems. It’s worth keeping in mind on the balance.
It’s a reminder that helps me see why point-based systems can really turn people off. I do still wish there was a way to reward people for their work on games, from running plots to helping people, but maybe the real reward is the friends we make along the way. 
@Gashlycrumb said in Player Ratios:
And how much of a not-drag must a player be to get a seat? Obviously much of the time when a staff storyteller is criticised for cherry-picking who to GM what they are doing is GMing the people who are the most fun for them.
If you don’t have GMing staff, and players running stories for one another is just how your game rolls, you really have no reason to worry about Abelard.
I keep coming back to this idea, and to Pyre, LBH – the piece about expectations. Shifting expectations away from staff somehow. But you can’t really do that without empowering players and giving them the tools to tell stories – and, with a nod to KB’s thread, to tell them in a way that people feel like they can touch the world.
I think people would probably still grumble about it, but damn, people always grumble about something.
@Faraday said in World Tone / Feeling:
Yet there are always players who want to civilize a Wild West game, create a superweapon that will defeat the Cylons in a Battlestar game, cure the zombie virus in a zombie game, etc.
This bit caught my eye. You are absolutely right. Not every game or gamerunner has or even WANTS this scope. Even if they do, you may have players with very different ideas of what fixing feudalism means. Being clear about scope can help shape expectation.
@Gashlycrumb said in Player Ratios:
If Bridget and Camille are in exciting GMed events every week or two and Abelard tries to get involved in things that lead to that but still doesn’t get to participate, or only ends up in such events three times a year, Abelard will be justifiably annoyed.
I get your point, but that circles back around to this issue for me:
@Pyrephox said in Player Ratios:
I wonder if a shift in expectations is also in order. Big, multi-scene plots that have a lot of people involved are exhausting. Sometimes the fun outweighs the effort, but it still IS a lot of effort and so many of us are at a point in our lives where we’ve got other things to do.
Maybe Abelard is just a drag.
I don’t want staff to be the gate on story. I want storytellers to be the keepers of their own stories. Staff gives storytellers the tools they need, but I would rather storytellers be able to tell the stories they want for the people they want.
Abelard wants a big plot? He can offer to run things for someone and then they run something for him, and maybe Abelard learns something along the way.
There’s also one thing @L-B-Heuschkel said which I stick on:
@L-B-Heuschkel said in Player Ratios:
We don’t have storytelling staff in the first place. We have a plot that is very easy for players to tell stories in – and we expect them to do so.
Again, shifting the expectation. Some players wait for story to happen. Some players make story happen. Admittedly, Keys makes it very easy for that, but any time we can lower barriers to make it easier for people, it seems like an obvious win. See: Tat and Roadspike’s prepackaged plot pitches.
@Gashlycrumb - On your pother point, the spreading plot / etc. system. It reminds me a bit of Firan’s community points. I don’t think their documentation lingers anywhere, but if anyone has it, I’d love to see it. One thing that I liked about the system is that people got CP (sorry) for running stories, obviously, BUT ALSO for helping out with admin tasks and helping people. I’d think any system would have to account for the value in both.
You’re right, though. People love points go up, and having a visible badge. (Achievement unlocked.)
@Pavel said in Player Ratios:
You don’t like saying no. I get that. You will have to do it anyway.
No.
If you’ve got Steve over there specifically telling long-running stories exclusively for his little cadre of were-mages, but you’ve also got Candice over there doing one-shots with all and sundry, they don’t math out to be equivalent.
Absolutely true. For me, I’m more interested in giving structure for a bunch of Steves to tell for various groups, while giving Candice the freedom and tools she needs. I think both are valuable, but for my purposes I’d structure around little knots of Steves.
I actually think it’s GREAT if there’s a storyteller who just wants to tell stories for their friends, but we as a broader culture have a problem with feeling like someone needs to include everyone.
ETA instead of doubleposting again:
@L-B-Heuschkel said in Player Ratios:
Keys is a sandbox, a framework for people to go off playing plots and stories of their own making and then returning to the central hub to interact and catch up.
I respect the approach, but I like more structured metaplots and the immediacy of a grid. I think your formula works fantastically well for you, though. 30-60 active is actually pretty respectable, and you’ve been around long enough to be notable. There’s clearly an audience for it, and there’s probably something to be learned about what you do to let players feel empowered to tell stories. Portal games carry a sort of ease that other settings will struggle with a bit more.
@KarmaBum I have a few ideas and examples:
One the private games run by friends, they started with authoritarian governments / police states locking down planets / settlement. Much of the stories were about breaking that down and overthrowing things. Literally overthrowing things.
One of the things that was particularly fun about one of them is how as the story changed, the entire page theme would change. New colors, new images, new CSS: all of it to reflect different settings, different places in the story.
It’s PROBABLY not super common, though. These were small games with a close GMing.
Way back when, long ago in the misty days of @Roz, @sao, @Tat, and I running an X-Men game, players actually took part in shaping the world in terms of manipulating the outcomes of legislation. We (Sao) did a fair amount of announcements to reflect the IC news and updates as well.
Everyone loves to see their actions reflected in game-wide updates and announcements. Firan and Arx both featured that to greater or lesser degrees. It’s cooler still in my opinion to see an actual shift of culture or laws. I’ve been working on my long-dreamed generational game where the ability to shift an in-game culture is a mechanic, somewhat modeled off Crusader Kings.
I like temporary room descriptions that can be updated on public spaces to reflect events that have happened, but sometimes people forget and it loses its impact. Still, I like that as an idea: a grid that updates to reflect actions people have taken.
@Yam Yeah, I don’t really like waitlisting, but I don’t have a great solution for the storyteller to player ratio problem. If you have more players than storytellers, then instead of a waitlist at the entry, it’s a waitlist for staff attention: put in a request and wait two years because there’s 150 players on the game. 
@STD said in Player Ratios:
What about cashing in the tokens to be able to make plots that actively change the world without having to go through ten layers of bureaucracy?
I see your point, but I totally agree with Faraday here:
@Faraday said in Player Ratios:
If somebody has a cool idea to change the world in a way that fits with your game vision, why would you require them to have OOC tokens to do so?
Conversely, if somebody has a terrible idea to change the game world in a way that wrecks the game, who cares how many tokens they have? It’s still not something you want.
I want players to be able to tell big stories, personally, without feeling like their tokens entitle them to remake the scope or scale of the game. Then again, that comes back to expectations too, so maybe Pyre’s right here:
@Pyrephox said in Player Ratios:
I wonder if a shift in expectations is also in order.
It’s really just about setting expectations and being clear about them. Like, yes, you can join this game, but we have a limited number of storytellers and thus–.