titsup
Strong in the Force
Posts: 819
|
Post by titsup on Jun 24, 2016 1:09:24 GMT
linkGiven most of the team have spoken out about gamergate and harassment of female players and game developers, you'd think this sort of thing would cause an immediate ban. Call me cynical, but I doubt this issue will be addressed. The offender will be left to leave unsolicited sexually explicit material in the world directed towards complete strangers. The fact that she describes him as 'Well known' means he is a) likely heavily invested and b) immune to the ban this sort of shit rightly deserves.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jun 24, 2016 2:10:57 GMT
Who gives a flying fuck.
It's one weirdo making a scene about another weirdo.
|
|
|
Post by chodekiller on Jun 24, 2016 7:47:33 GMT
From Lazarus Long "I must say I gotta agree here..... We got Brothels and all sorts of adult themed things planned once this game goes full out live. One of the things I fully expected to see was erotic books from our creative writers out there. Down on Censorship!!!! The book in question has been out for a week or more that I'm aware of got a copy as well for my collection. Several authors apparently have reprinted this as well. And for the record I would support a rating system that authors can use to rate their writings PG, R, X etc. Laz" finally, the slightly tarded looking NBNN guy gets to RP his erotic fantasies. Attachments:
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jun 24, 2016 11:31:46 GMT
LARPA
|
|
|
Post by nemolives on Jun 24, 2016 13:09:21 GMT
Maybe I'm just particularly crabby this morning, having woken up with my country falling apart and riven by poison from yesterday's referendum; but I think everyone everywhere has got this wrong. Everyone sucks on this!
Firstly Argyle, I have to say I think you've got the wrong end of the stick on this one; I don't think it's 'unsolicited sexually explicit material in the world directed towards complete strangers', as Chodekiller's quote suggests, it was more likely that someone wanted to set up a lore library and then didn't specify they didn't want certain types of books. Yes it's possible that someone wanted to get off on hearing they were shocked by being exposed to sexual content, but to me it reads more like 'Over sensitive flower doesn't take personal responsibility for filtering, or is strong enough to deal with accidental exposure'. It's a lack of adult understanding of social relationships in the part of the complainer, not a reason to ban the person leaving the book.
Lazarus Long is wrong too; it isn't censorship to have personal preferences. Much as I want to slap anyone who thinks that their personal feelings mean something MUST be directed at them, and MUST be objectively creepy just because they feel it is, everyone does have the right to choose the time and place to feel sexy in their own way... or not, if they don't want. Who ever the guy was who friended the person had the perfect opportunity to just say "Hey, I'm gonna leave you some books as requested, some of them are a bit risque though, still want them?" It just shows how self centred and bloody tone deaf the remaining community is. Ask first, you fucking muppet.
Chodekiller is wrong for mocking the guy, when he does at least suggest a rating system to allow people to make informed choices. Also, gay bear marriage is fine by me. If that's your thing, get your freak on. Or doing it in ren clothing in the woods. Even weirdos deserve sex. Up yours, Chodester.
Dodgy is just plain wrong for being a fucking snail. Hey, get out of here with your slime leaving shit.
Bollocks to all of you!
|
|
|
Post by fossil on Jun 24, 2016 14:27:07 GMT
Glad I didn't comment Best community ever though! It's like all that's left over there are some of the loneliest individuals that feel with such a small community they are somebody. I have pity. The creatures crawl out of the dark to go play but they've been embedded in darkness so long they don't know any proper forms of how to play.
|
|
|
Post by chodekiller on Jun 24, 2016 18:02:46 GMT
Maybe I'm just particularly crabby this morning, having woken up with my country falling apart and riven by poison from yesterday's referendum; but I think everyone everywhere has got this wrong. Everyone sucks on this! Firstly Argyle, I have to say I think you've got the wrong end of the stick on this one; I don't think it's 'unsolicited sexually explicit material in the world directed towards complete strangers', as Chodekiller's quote suggests, it was more likely that someone wanted to set up a lore library and then didn't specify they didn't want certain types of books. Yes it's possible that someone wanted to get off on hearing they were shocked by being exposed to sexual content, but to me it reads more like 'Over sensitive flower doesn't take personal responsibility for filtering, or is strong enough to deal with accidental exposure'. It's a lack of adult understanding of social relationships in the part of the complainer, not a reason to ban the person leaving the book. Lazarus Long is wrong too; it isn't censorship to have personal preferences. Much as I want to slap anyone who thinks that their personal feelings mean something MUST be directed at them, and MUST be objectively creepy just because they feel it is, everyone does have the right to choose the time and place to feel sexy in their own way... or not, if they don't want. Who ever the guy was who friended the person had the perfect opportunity to just say "Hey, I'm gonna leave you some books as requested, some of them are a bit risque though, still want them?" It just shows how self centred and bloody tone deaf the remaining community is. Ask first, you fucking muppet. Chodekiller is wrong for mocking the guy, when he does at least suggest a rating system to allow people to make informed choices. Also, gay bear marriage is fine by me. If that's your thing, get your freak on. Or doing it in ren clothing in the woods. Even weirdos deserve sex. Up yours, Chodester. Dodgy is just plain wrong for being a fucking snail. Hey, get out of here with your slime leaving shit. Bollocks to all of you! I think it is just funny that the same pussies that can't handle the word carebear, label people toxic for point out sota's shit scam, and try to censor them are now suddenly advocating for blowjob stories. It is all fine by me, but noting that the slightly retarded looking Laz is a fucking hypocrite is just to good to pass up.
|
|
|
Post by johndoe on Jun 24, 2016 19:14:20 GMT
Its locked, even tho the OP complaining said she wanted it all open and in public. And those other scumbags in that thread that think is is a defensible thing to do, disgusting people.
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jun 24, 2016 19:36:44 GMT
Seriously is this a joke?
Jesus fucking Christ
Storm in a tea cup and bitching about it is worse lol
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 25, 2016 22:33:53 GMT
Maybe I'm just particularly crabby this morning, having woken up with my country falling apart and riven by poison from yesterday's referendum; but I think everyone everywhere has got this wrong. Everyone sucks on this! Firstly Argyle, I have to say I think you've got the wrong end of the stick on this one; I don't think it's 'unsolicited sexually explicit material in the world directed towards complete strangers', as Chodekiller's quote suggests, it was more likely that someone wanted to set up a lore library and then didn't specify they didn't want certain types of books. Yes it's possible that someone wanted to get off on hearing they were shocked by being exposed to sexual content, but to me it reads more like 'Over sensitive flower doesn't take personal responsibility for filtering, or is strong enough to deal with accidental exposure'. It's a lack of adult understanding of social relationships in the part of the complainer, not a reason to ban the person leaving the book. Lazarus Long is wrong too; it isn't censorship to have personal preferences. Much as I want to slap anyone who thinks that their personal feelings mean something MUST be directed at them, and MUST be objectively creepy just because they feel it is, everyone does have the right to choose the time and place to feel sexy in their own way... or not, if they don't want. Who ever the guy was who friended the person had the perfect opportunity to just say "Hey, I'm gonna leave you some books as requested, some of them are a bit risque though, still want them?" It just shows how self centred and bloody tone deaf the remaining community is. Ask first, you fucking muppet. Chodekiller is wrong for mocking the guy, when he does at least suggest a rating system to allow people to make informed choices. Also, gay bear marriage is fine by me. If that's your thing, get your freak on. Or doing it in ren clothing in the woods. Even weirdos deserve sex. Up yours, Chodester. Dodgy is just plain wrong for being a fucking snail. Hey, get out of here with your slime leaving shit. Bollocks to all of you! First of all, I can understand being bent out of shape over Brexit. What a mess that's going to become a bigger mess. Once they discover things don't get better, and probably will get worse, who will they then blame? What's equally as bad: it may be an indication that Trump will get elected. Bad world. But piss off if you think you can tell everyone in here to piss off just because you're pissed off over Brexit. Probably no one else on these forums is from the UK, so it wasn't us. And last, It doesn't matter if sexual content in books should not be censored, that she is, or isn't, an "oversensitive flower." The fact she does not want to see this stuff in her POT, she has the right to say no. No to that BS she did not invite. And in this overly oversensitive world we now live in, where nothing is ever politically correct, so what? A person's feelings should be honored unless it's causing harm to other living things. She should not just have to "get over it." Portalarium handled it correctly, and by their EULA. That's all the more that should be said about it. As for Lazarus Long, it's because of sick fucks like him that I don't want anything to do with that game. Brothels indeed. I hope every guy that wants to play out his fantasies poses as a woman in that brothel. For his "benefit."
|
|
|
Post by nemolives on Jun 26, 2016 0:00:18 GMT
And last, It doesn't matter if sexual content in books should not be censored, that she is, or isn't, an "oversensitive flower." The fact she does not want to see this stuff in her POT, she has the right to say no. No to that BS she did not invite. And in this overly oversensitive world we now live in, where nothing is ever politically correct, so what? A person's feelings should be honored unless it's causing harm to other living things. Everyone has the right to say "No". They don't have the right to demand the question is never asked of them though, because then you're not looking to live alongside each other in respect, but demanding people pre-censor themselves before the debate even begins. Again, if she was collecting books but didn't state before hand what kind of books she found unacceptable, then she has no right to publicly shame, and call creepy someone who may not have meant any harm by it. Change the context a bit, and it's easy to recognise this attitude for what it is. If I were to get angry, and try and public shame the Indian family down the road for the smell of curry that comes up the street, because they didn't ask me if I wanted their stinky food in my neighbourhood before they started cooking it, you'd recognise me as a racist, even if I had a deadly curry allergy say; because the first step of reasonable co-habitation in this world would be to go and discuss it with them. Or find out if there was some sort of practical effort I could make to adapt. It isn't to just be enraged because someone different to me is noticeable in my life. This isn't a hypothetical by the way; compare that now to the case where a curry killed someone and the owner was justifiably jailed. In that case, the man who died made quite clear that he couldn't eat peanuts, and to save a few pennies the owner ignored his express wishes and cost someone their life. Now if in my prior example, the curry house didn't know, it would be a horrendous accident and most rational people would recognise it is totally different. But people nowadays are so self centred and over sensitive that they can't separate the content from the intent, because they don't care about what anyone else intended at all. They get enraged when political pamphlets from the other side are pushed through their letterbox. They get enraged when people with another viewpoint are allowed on the television or their social media. They are enraged that they are challenged in any way, at any time; they want to live in a world which can't possibly exist, one where nothing accidental ever happens. Someone puts some reprehensible media in my mailbox? I say "You didn't know, but please don't do that again." SECOND Time, yes be pissed off because they should know then. But the first thing you do is find out if there's a "No mailing" list or an "Unsubscribe". You make your wishes clear, and then you have a better idea of what their intent was if they actually are ignoring it. You don't just be a selfish ignorant dumbfuck and demand they stop being who you think they are before even talking to them. And anyway, I can respect people's choices... but if you're offended by sex, you're a ridiculous prude in my household. Sorry, it's that different morality again. Goodness me, how awful that people having fun, guiltless sex exist, eh? Of all the things to make a thread about how the Shroud community sucks, that's where the few remaining players want to make a stand? In a game whose only real fun is purchased for thousands of dollars in the store? Portalarium is already their pimp, they're just arguing about what kind of tricks they are prepared to do...
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 26, 2016 10:33:04 GMT
And last, It doesn't matter if sexual content in books should not be censored, that she is, or isn't, an "oversensitive flower." The fact she does not want to see this stuff in her POT, she has the right to say no. No to that BS she did not invite. And in this overly oversensitive world we now live in, where nothing is ever politically correct, so what? A person's feelings should be honored unless it's causing harm to other living things. Everyone has the right to say "No". They don't have the right to demand the question is never asked of them though, because then you're not looking to live alongside each other in respect, but demanding people pre-censor themselves before the debate even begins. Again, if she was collecting books but didn't state before hand what kind of books she found unacceptable, then she has no right to publicly shame, and call creepy someone who may not have meant any harm by it. Change the context a bit, and it's easy to recognise this attitude for what it is. If I were to get angry, and try and public shame the Indian family down the road for the smell of curry that comes up the street, because they didn't ask me if I wanted their stinky food in my neighbourhood before they started cooking it, you'd recognise me as a racist, even if I had a deadly curry allergy say; because the first step of reasonable co-habitation in this world would be to go and discuss it with them. Or find out if there was some sort of practical effort I could make to adapt. It isn't to just be enraged because someone different to me is noticeable in my life. This isn't a hypothetical by the way; compare that now to the case where a curry killed someone and the owner was justifiably jailed. In that case, the man who died made quite clear that he couldn't eat peanuts, and to save a few pennies the owner ignored his express wishes and cost someone their life. Now if in my prior example, the curry house didn't know, it would be a horrendous accident and most rational people would recognise it is totally different. But people nowadays are so self centred and over sensitive that they can't separate the content from the intent, because they don't care about what anyone else intended at all. They get enraged when political pamphlets from the other side are pushed through their letterbox. They get enraged when people with another viewpoint are allowed on the television or their social media. They are enraged that they are challenged in any way, at any time; they want to live in a world which can't possibly exist, one where nothing accidental ever happens. Someone puts some reprehensible media in my mailbox? I say "You didn't know, but please don't do that again." SECOND Time, yes be pissed off because they should know then. But the first thing you do is find out if there's a "No mailing" list or an "Unsubscribe". You make your wishes clear, and then you have a better idea of what their intent was if they actually are ignoring it. You don't just be a selfish ignorant dumbfuck and demand they stop being who you think they are before even talking to them. And anyway, I can respect people's choices... but if you're offended by sex, you're a ridiculous prude in my household. Sorry, it's that different morality again. Goodness me, how awful that people having fun, guiltless sex exist, eh? Of all the things to make a thread about how the Shroud community sucks, that's where the few remaining players want to make a stand? In a game whose only real fun is purchased for thousands of dollars in the store? Portalarium is already their pimp, they're just arguing about what kind of tricks they are prepared to do... The curry example does not work at all, as an analogy about this. A person should not have to ask a first time, not to receive this material, even if they are collecting books. Why? Because people have been asked not to have sexually explicit material in the game. It could not be against Portalarium's EULA unless they already stated it. The game is not rated x, and a person has no way to tell if they are giving a sexually explicit book to a minor who is posing as an adult. If that adult asks for such material, then that's a different story. At the same time that people should have freedom of expression, there is a such thing as decency. Your criteria for decency differs from other people's, and there is no way to know what offends. But sorry, to think any random stranger would automatically embrace, accept and appreciate some man talking about a blowjob and explicit sex, I'd say that person knew they were crossing the line and taking a risk of offending. Anyone who would have no clue it could be offensive is out of touch. Speaking of out of touch.... I want to know why a person would feel they have the right to go full out to explicit sexual content before even talking to a person? The same BS we see Trump spewing publicly, repeatedly, then backpeddling, repeatedly, because they didn't think before they opened their mouth? They have rights, it's freedom of expression, they can say any damn thing they want and could give a shit if it offends, then later say, "Oh, I didn't mean you when I was appearing racist." Oh gee, I didn't mean to offend you. After the fact. People need to re-enable common courtesy before they open their mouths, especially in this day and age when everything is spiraling out of control. Common courtesy we're discussing. "Oh gee, you were collecting books, and I thought this would be a great book for anyone's collection," does not cut it. The guy knew it was indecent and not common courtesy. If you claim he didn't, then I'd say BS. And your debate is BS. There are places we can go, all over the internet, for explicit sexual content. A game, where it was not invited nor allowed, is not the place. Yet, she should have "politely" asked him to stop first? That would be like standing on the street, and some guy comes up in a raincoat, flashes the woman, and she says - he should not have done that! "Well, you should have asked him not to first." Now, that is just a stupid argument. The fact there is EULA prohibiting sexual content is the request the first time, so that 5000 women in the game don't have to "ask him to stop first." He had the moral and civil obligation to ask first, before depositing his spew in her collection.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 26, 2016 10:57:12 GMT
if you're offended by sex, you're a ridiculous prude in my household Then invite your children, and the general public, to witness your sex. Don't ask them first either, just put it out there for everyone. Let's remember, if a person chooses to view sexual content, they have to load a webpage to see it, go to a store to buy it, or walk into a theater to see it - that means they enjoy seeing all that, and there will be no consequences. That is consent. But if someone were to grab a child or woman by the arm and take them into an X rated theater, that kid is a prude if they cry watching 2 people kiss and a lot more? That woman is a prude if she feels visually accosted by watching total strangers having sex without love, and a prude if she prefers the intimacy and privacy of a loving (and even adventurous) sexual act? Hedonism is just fine for everyone? They didn't need the kid's permission, the kid or woman should politely ask not to see sexually explicit stuff first!
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 26, 2016 11:16:50 GMT
Someone puts some reprehensible media in my mailbox? I say "You didn't know, but please don't do that again." Personally, it should be the opposite. We get junk mail of all sorts, unbidden, and just because we happen to have a mailbox, they think they have the right to deluge it with shit we never asked for. Tons of trees are used, and wasted, to make all that mail. It's wasteful on all counts. I don't bother to look at the content, but pornography only comes in one's mailbox if they have ordered it in the past, and it typically comes in a brown paper wrapping. Junk mail should be prohibited entirely. From The Cost of Junk Mail
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 26, 2016 11:34:50 GMT
From the above article: "Though a national “Do Not Mail” program doesn’t exist, individual states and cities have taken action to combat this issue."
In the US, you can enter your phone number for a "Do Not Call" list, because telemarketers believe that just because you have a phone, they have the right to foist their calls and junk on you.
Well, honey, you have a flower, so that means I can stick this material there if I want to. You can tell me, after the fact, if you don't want it.
|
|
|
Post by khael on Jun 26, 2016 14:16:59 GMT
Well said Caliya
|
|
|
Post by nemolives on Jun 26, 2016 17:48:09 GMT
The curry example does not work at all, as an analogy about this. It doesn't work for YOU, because you aren't capable of sharing the same perspective, and that instantly proves my point. The basis of respect is starting from a position of awareness that your view is not universal, and not absolute. Nor is international law, cultural values, or any other perspective you want to come at this from. That you assume there is an absolute is just an illustration of the weakness of your argument, and lasts only as far as your own nose. It could not be against Portalarium's EULA unless they already stated it. Except Shroud has quite happily not only ignored deliberately sexualised content, remember when they added a red basque and miniskirt into the store themselves? Of course you do, that's your thread complaining about it... when it suits you. Suddenly though Shroud supposedly isn't happy with sexual content? If you were honestly arguing facts and not your perspective, you would admit the EULA isn't consistently applied at all, because like most companies, they won't take action unless there's a complaint. Because they know, existing in an international marketplace, standards of offence are not uniform. The EULA is always written to give them the right to intervene between personal disputes, not legislate for specific definitions of it. Which you'd know if you'd actually read the EULA. CTRL+F for "Sex", it doesn't appear. The only applicable definition is two words, "adult content" which is actionable " at the discretion of PORTALARIUM management, employees, and moderators". Under UK and US law, people under the age of 18 cannot sign a legally binding contract. The EULA as such doesn't apply, and if they are using a product with a EULA below that age, legally they should have been given parental permission to do so. How does a parent decide if a game is child safe? Well an MMO always gives itself an opt out for User Generated content, because it can't be predicted. But most MMOs then go for PG-13, because some adult content is to be expected from their horny playerbase. Shroud's own telethons are rated PG-13 in fact. That they haven't bothered getting around to PG rating their own game yet is just another area where they are proving amateur hour, but that doesn't excuse the fact that, in a game which has no stated age restriction or definition of what adult content is in either it's EULA or it's marketing, steam profile etc, if there are players in game who are underage, they're there both without legal cover and with poor parental advice because what kind of parent doesn't know adults with adult interests play MMOs by now? Of course, we're not talking about a child here, but about someone dealing "Writer to writer, I figured." We're talking about two adults who are part of a community that is aware of each other, at least as "writers". Certainly enough to know who she was, friend her (and be accepted) and know where her home was to drop the book off. Sticking to facts helps, Caliya. Who was the book writer? No idea, and nor do you. Perhaps it was one of the people sharing innuendos with her in this thread? There's that chaste Shroud again for you, I guess. Perhaps it was someone confused by her statement that She has plans to welcome other misfits into the small community; and thought it meant she was a sexual libertine. But the point isn't to blacken her name or make her look bad, rather to point out that, just as she states "I know you're fairly well known on the Forums. I've seen some of your posts", other people can see her posts too, and will have an opinion upon them. You don't get to police the world's gaze, much as you might like too. And we're not even talking here about a book that says "I, player XXX, want to rape you, Cianna." She even states in the thread, which I have to wonder if some of you bothered to read, "Well, the sex was integral to the plot, so there is that. " It wasn't directed AT her; Later in the thread, and it was quoted here but once more people just want to ignore facts, "The book in question has been out for a week or more that I'm aware of got a copy as well for my collection. Several authors apparently have reprinted this as well."; it's a widely shared book, that the community is already aware of, and IT WASNT AN ISSUE UNTIL ONE PLAYER COMPLAINED. Budner, who was hitting on her in the innuendo thread, states "OK I know what y'all are thinking and this wasn't me. I have an alibi. Several people at the orgy can vouch for me. :eek:". But no sexual content at Shroud, remember? Fucks sake. But at the end of the thread they clarify sexual content is now out. Except when it's naked chicken dances eh, Firelotus? Or talk of brothels in game. I see an awful lot of victim blaming here for someone who fell foul of Portalarium's incompetence and hypocritical actions. You live in Germany now, and haven't yet understood we in Europe laugh at your quaint hang ups about sexual identity? The compulsory age of sex education in stiff upper lip Britain is 11 years old. Because here's where your view is ridiculous again; we're not talking about the right to say "Mexicans are filthy evil rapists", the right to be dumb, abusive, stupid; we're talking about something which, if done properly, is fun, healthy, fulfilling and part of a decent liberal society. Again, ignoring the fact you don't seem to even know what content was shared (it's erotic fiction, and the person DID friend them presumably to talk first), the idea that someone being exposed to a penis is a horrible thing beyond compare is outdated and repressive. Hell, Hen Nights in the UK now traditionally carry these through our city centres in the middle of the day. For those too scared to click links, that's a google image search for "Hen Night Inflatable Penis". Some penis costumes there too, although it's hard to get UK style drunk in one, so you don't see them as often. No, they didn't KNOW the person would be offended before giving the book; you'd have to assume the worst of someone to think "They'll be outraged by something fun and healthy", so again I repeat, because getting enraged is more important than listening to what your opponent actually believes, you ridiculous SJW mirror images of Trump; I don't justify giving her the book before asking if she'd want one... but then again, I'm 20 years past the cutting edge of culture now. At least 40% of teenage girls send sexts now. Open, explicit digital communication is at the centre of their world these days. Who are you to tell them they can't? How do you know the author of the book wasn't a teenage girl herself? Whole lotta assumptions in this thread so far... Simply because you agree with the "EW, other people think of sex near me" reaction. Yeah, they do. Learn to live with and respect other people too. That's what you're doing if you invite them into a non-PG rated game which has been pushing adult content on the forums for years... Ever been to a sex club Caliya? With your puritanical nature, I doubt it. So you don't know that people with a healthy view of consent know that, if it suggests ON THE DOOR that there might be sex, you don't take children because sexual content is EXPECTED. And I'd take your whole argument alot more seriously if you hadn't spent ages on this forum complaining that Shroud has been using Sex to get people through the door. Yeah, that just about sums up your attitude to sex; obviously the awareness that other people have sexual identities is the same as a pervert on the street in a dirty mac. So you're an expert on ALL moral meanings of the term "Being exposed to Junk", eh? Because I'd rather hope you'd have to be, to pre-determine what kind of post someone is allowed to send or receive. Really? You think any state or individual should have that right? And that's why we have Opt Out lists by the way. At least, why some countries do. Different state laws and all that again. So people can say "None of this please", after the fact. I hope you didn't order any of Prince's back catalogue recently; or even heard it accidentally on a youtube clip. Tipper Gore classed it as pornography once. And we don't want unsolicited porn, do we? Jesus fucking christ, you really don't live in the real world, do you? Somehow, you want us to respect difference, but never actually be confronted with it, or be responsible for making informed choices based on exposure to it? You're quite the Helen Lovejoy it seems. Yeah, they can... IF you've opted into being a flower. Which having a mail box is doing, but good to see you went straight for the creepy rapist imagery again. No gender based hang ups on your side at all, is there? Or if you don't like being seen as a Mailbox Flower, you could just get off your asses and put everything back into the mailbox with "Not At This Address" or "Return To Sender" written on it. But that means taking responsibility, being active yourself instead of just bitching about how everyone else needs to respect your right to be a flower but only to certain kinds of envelopes, and they have to somehow guess what kind that is before you tell them. And then you'll just scream impotently about some of them being a creepy brown envelope and how no other mailbox should have to put up with them either. Or you could lobby your politicians to implement the kind of junk laws we have in the UK. Those different national laws and standards again, would you believe it? Or just fuck off, I really don't care. You lost the argument the moment I found the thread where you complained Shroud was encouraging sex. I just wrote all of this for everyone else out there to see we have dumb arguments this side of the aisle too. "Sex is as bad as Trump", indeed.
|
|
|
Post by nemolives on Jun 26, 2016 17:53:31 GMT
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jun 26, 2016 21:03:25 GMT
Wow. This topic. I do enjoy reading this stuff.
I feel Nem makes sense in the last paragraph and sums my view.
If you don't like something don't read it. If it was targeted at you inform the person who did it that you don't like it. If he continues notify the authorities.
Furre it's a frigging game it's easy to stomp it out.
Cal I'm sure ishe imagining worst case scenario.
Again this really is a null issue and is a case of snowflakes.
This is meant to be a mature game remember?
|
|
|
Post by myrcello on Jun 27, 2016 12:14:56 GMT
For me there are 3 points i find interesting about this subject and i will just give my opinion.
1. The Rules that have been set - and the violation of them.
2. Why did the person communicate over the public forum? The motivation behind it?
2. The discussions following not based on the Rules but on personal position is bound not to provide a common solution ever.
to point 1:
Very simple - If we just use the Policy and Rules it is plain simple.
We purchase a game based on what they define - If they say Adult content not permitted then it is expected to be taken serious and if someone violates it and someone is offended of it - take it out - and react regarding the punishments you define.
to point 2: This is what i do not understand - why take it to the Forum to the public? Can someone explain the motivation behind it?
Does she wan´t me to react on this? Does she wan´t me to get angry? Does she wan´t me to get curious? Lets find out who this person is and make his name public? Does she shout out for help? Help? I was unable to handle this situation? Or approve how she did handle the situation.
Please someone explain the motivation she had?
I assume she wanted to use this book and experience to ignite a discussion about a topic that is all over the internet still very present. And she succeeded 100% as it even spoiled over to this forum.
to point 3: As we all grew up with different sexual experiences, different genders, different cultures , different religions who brain wash us how to react to sexuality , different times wee are born with different family who raise us about sex- hippy parents, nazi time grandparents ( extreme different views ), abuse we experienced - therefore all react different.
simpe comparison: I might not find a spider bad in a game, but someone with panic from spiders might not play a game with spiders. for some such a book with such content might cause based on abusive experience the same reactions.
How would i have reacted.
I asume if i had played a female avatar and someone would have written me this - based on my personality how i stand to this - I would have ask myself if i might have finally succeeded in roleplaying a perfect female and a i am guilty now having to disappoint the person who is writing me.
I would probalbly placed the book beside my avatars bed as it would be funny. I would have probably placed it even better beside the toilet in my house. I would not have reportet it.
But placing it on the Forum i would not have done. I feel strong enough to handle him alone. But that is me. I understand if others are offended based on there personality.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 15:36:13 GMT
why take it to the Forum to the public? Can someone explain the motivation behind it? I wondered the same thing. Why did she try to call someone out publicly? To draw attention to something, but who knows what her motive was. This could be called milking the gamer gate situation. She could have started a thread about the topic in general, without the way she handled it. But, she did do it with some humor by saying, at least say hello first? Who knows. It is an important issue, and one that Portalarium opened themselves up to when they decided to let players write their own books in the game. There's usually a reason that other gaming companies don't allow things like this, and here we have a classic example of why not. Do I think writing books in a game is good? It depends on how it's handled. I have no way to know how they planned on monitoring or moderating such a thing. It's a can of worms. It was from the beginning, and it's clearly still a can of worms. At least this topic started people talking about it. But they should have a thread about the topic that isn't continually locked.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 15:46:19 GMT
It doesn't work for YOU, because you aren't capable of sharing the same perspective, and that instantly proves my point. And I could say the same to you, back atcha. Identical sentence. So your point is? Identical sentence, except I would add, without resorting to calling someone a prude simply because they do not share your view and solution. So let me get this straight. If a person believes that sex between people - male, female, hetero, gay, lesbian, trans, orgies, any acrobatic position or paraphenalia you choose to use, in any private setting you choose, for love or purely for pleasure, as often as you like, then that person is a prude because - and I really have to emphasize this - they want and expect mutual consent. Because honestly, that is how you just defined me. A prude when I'm open to (and accept) all those other views I just mentioned (but does not necessarily mean I partake in all of them). But I am not open to a man approaching a complete stranger, a woman in this case, and not regarding who they are actually approaching (child, man, woman). When it comes to explicit sexual material, it should be a given that one should approach it with mutual respect. That is my opinion, and I stand by my opinion. Just because you happen to think someone is "hung up" or a "prude" because they should automatically accept all public sexual content, does not make you right for everyone. It makes it right for you.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 15:59:03 GMT
that's your thread complaining about it... when it suits you. Suddenly though Shroud supposedly isn't happy with sexual content? Yes, I complained about them selling sexually oriented add-on store items. Who are they kidding, adding hot tubs and thinking people aren't going to get naked and hot chat? Of course they knew it. My story hasn't changed one iota. I am also complaining that some dimwit handed a sexually explicit book to someone else, without warning them or asking if it was acceptable. That person didn't click on some "buy" button, knowing what they were getting. If someone buys some hot tub or skimpy outfit in the store, that is consent. If they decide to show up to a hot tub party, they know full well what they're walking into. But a book from some random guy? Get a grip. Of course Portalarium opened themselves to this kind of crap. And I thought they finally handled it the right way - after it falling on deaf ears. But according to some sources, they handled it terribly again. These idiots don't learn. But let me sum up by saying, my complaint went beyond what they were selling in the add-on store, and you full well know that. My complaint was that a bunch of men were making decisions for what women were wearing. Men are creating the skins, and making the decisions if a woman can dress like that. Some people, like majoria (as we all well know) have been asking for sexy clothing. But are they consulting women prior to adding these items? Are women designing these skins? Hell no. We live in a world where men have dictated what women can, and can't, wear. I say enough is enough. If they get complaints from women, they brought it on themselves.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 16:00:35 GMT
Budner, who was hitting on her in the innuendo thread, states "OK I know what y'all are thinking and this wasn't me. I have an alibi. Several people at the orgy can vouch for me. :eek:". But no sexual content at Shroud, remember? Fucks sake. He thinks he's a funny guy, and was trying to be funny and lighten the mood of the thread. Me, I think he's a real creep. I wouldn't get in some jizz filled hot tub with him and his buddies. They're probably all guys anyway.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 16:15:19 GMT
Shows what you know about German laws. Have you ever driven right across the border to Denmark? The streets are literally lined with sex shops. Shows what you know about American sex education. Children as young as 5 have been taught sex ed in school. As for hang ups about sexual identity, just because something is allowed does not necessarily mean it's a good idea. And notice, they say at night, as long as children are not present? Ya, there's this thing in games that kids hide behind adult pixel bodies. So what if teens are sexting. What is your point? Let everyone just fuck on flag poles? Does that mean you aren't a prude? What a weird way to define "open-minded." There are nudist colonies and nudist beaches in America also. People go to a public park that allows sex. So what is your point? When people go, it's by consent. I don't get why you think it's ok not to have consent. So now, just because someone added someone else as a friend (complete strangers have done the same with me), it is implied that anything goes? Everything is acceptable? You're dreaming. Dreaming is one thing, reality is another. He wasn't exposing his penis. He was describing a blowjob. When someone writes about getting a blowjob in a book, you act as if it's no different than someone skipping down the street. If that is your view of sex between two people, that is your life and your view. Should you force your view on others? Privacy has always been the rule throughout history, even if a couple of parks in Europe allow public sex (in the dark, after kids are in bed is still in there). If you think it's time for the world to wake up to your views, you have a long way to go. The fact you just dissed Americans for having hangups shows your racism. You haven't a clue except what your media feeds you on TV. America, by the way, is the largest producer of porn in the world.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 16:19:17 GMT
"They'll be outraged by something fun and healthy" Sex between 2 consenting adults, is fun and healthy. Sharing a view that could potentially be misconstrued, is not wise.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 16:29:41 GMT
But that means taking responsibility, being active yourself instead of just bitching about how everyone else needs to respect your right to be a flower I could have written this to you - that means the guy should have taken the responsibility first, rather than assume anything. Rather than assume she gave consent to read that shit just because she "friended" him. But you say everyone needs to respect that guy's right to distribute explicit sexual material. Return it to who? A game didn't have a post office box. Hell, they don't even allow players to drop items. Your rant is utterly misdirected because who knows? You've probably done some of this shit yourself. Time to own up to responsibility for that behavior. You're pissed because of Brexit, where a whole crap pile of people think they're going to shut out immigrants the way Trump wants to build a wall along the Mexican border. And you're throwing me in that same category and you're so wrong, it's really quite laughable. And while I think the vote in favor or Brexit was pretty screwed up, there is a large percentage of Europeans that are breathing a sigh of relief because the UK has been obstructionists to progress for years. Just like Texas wants to secede from the US, there are a lot of Americans that say, go then, good riddance because too many conservative right winger Presidents have come from there, have trashed the economy, and tried to stop progress. The red US states hate the blue, but in reality, it's the blue states that foot the bill for the majority of poor whites in those red states. Yet the red states blame the blue for their terrible conditions and lives. It's the same in the UK. But now you want to lash out at everyone and call them a delicate flower just because they want mutual consent before opening a book and finding something they certainly did not expect.
|
|
Caliya
Strong in the Force
People fight to gain things they can't take with them in the end
Posts: 2,121
|
Post by Caliya on Jun 27, 2016 16:44:24 GMT
You lost the argument the moment I found the thread where you complained Shroud was encouraging sex. You lost the argument when you support non-consensual sexual content.
|
|
|
Post by myrcello on Jun 27, 2016 16:57:28 GMT
By the way.
I have learned to agree the Point of Caliya that at the end the females decide what clothing they would like in a game. No matter if they are only 10% of the playerbase or not But still males can love creating fashion and they can provide options for them to decide.
So in the future i may say: I would suggest this as an option for the females as i find it pretty.
But they decide
|
|
dodgy
Strong in the Force
Posts: 1,171
|
Post by dodgy on Jun 27, 2016 22:20:39 GMT
Cal u have chafed my nipples.
We need to have dinner together sometime
|
|