Forager

Whoops. Laucianna is not detailing 3 options. She's giving 3 example outcomes if players DO find out what happens. The first one is the GM telling the complainant that no action will be taken. Right. She is saying it should be possible and that they should tell someone what actions they took. Umm... she does think it lol. That's exactly what she is suggesting. That's exactly what we are arguing should happen. It's not an option. It's an example of how it should work.

My stance is "make the punishments known to ensure fairness and give victims of harassment peace of mind."

Whoops. They want players to trust the system. That's what the GM said, at least. If they don't want that, then of course there's no reason to be accountable.

That's fine.

The players. The people in charge.

Yikes. We are talking about fairness, accountability and a host of other ethical considerations. Maybe you personally think it's ok to keep people in the dark for their own good, or your own good or a greater good... or any reason at all, but that is an ethical choice. Maybe you don't personally think it's unethical. We are talking about an authority with an interest in people's safety and trust. That's... lol... sorry there's no gentle way: that just is an ethical issue. To suggest that it has "nothing to do with ethics" is objectively false. Ethics is a broad and complicated subject and at a certain point it becomes open to interpretation, but like I said... this is pretty basic stuff. Good luck, buddy.

Businesses hide the results of their internal investigations because investigating their employees is essentially investigating themselves. It's inherently unethical. If you made a complaint about Homecoming staff, it would make sense for them to do this to protect themselves. But we are not employees of Homecoming. We are users, so this should be more akin to a justice system than HR policy. When you report a crime, the authorities are legally required to notify you whether the offender is charged or not, when their court date is and when they are released. This is fairly basic ethics. "Offender privacy" is a laughable concept in real life, and even funnier in an anonymous online game. The only reason to avoid accountability is so that you don't have to enforce the rules consistently and fairly.

That's fine. If the rules are enforced consistently and the decisions are made based on evidence, this is a non-problem. Anyone who is unhappy with the rules being enforced fairly is unhappy with the rules, so it's ok for them to be unhappy. Peace of mind for the victims of harassment. Faith in the system. Transparency and accountability for the people enforcing the rules. A safe and fair environment.

I see the ROGUE in there for sure. It sounds like dominator assaults as a primary and secondaries with a combination of debuff and weaker controls, similar to Blasters' /devices would be the ticket. The other blaster secondaries would have to be Devicified.

Someone write this script!

I think that's certainly how a lot of people play... Others just play their character through the task forces, slot with SO's, convert to IOs as they can and only buy what that character can afford. Some bankroll their new toons, some don't. Who are you trying to slow down? Any reductions in influence gain or availability of enhancements would hurt the traditional player exponentially more than the farmers. TL;DR Raising prices hurts poor people more than rich people.

The Roman and Greek customs were awesome. You put a lot of work into populating those enemy groups. They integrate into the game so well that they didn't immediately stick out as customs. The river god AV was badass. The Stygian Soldiers were... interesting looking lol. I love that there was a story-based reason for them being bosses. They made the last AV fight pretty tricky. I had to combat TP all over.

Are you saying they changed the way they functioned, or the information that was displayed to players? My understanding was that it is a percentage, just not displayed as such.

I sink the beacons in the floor. I also used upside down stone portals sunk into floor to hide the teleporters in vehicles.

Then you should tell them what happens.

It certainly should be. It's the only ethical way to enforce rules on people. If someone is harassed, victimized or hurt by someone violating the rules, then they should know what the consequences are. They shouldn't accept on blind faith that the rules are properly enforced. How else would you keep the enforcers accountable? What if they're being lazy, incompetent, biaseed or are afraid of conflict? How would you know? And any person who can be trusted to enforce rules fairly should want accountability. Hiding disciplinary actions from victims is unethical.

I think they tried that once...

It doesn't have to be money, but a competent candidate would need to get something out of it. Students and interns will work for free if there's enough opportunity to learn and gain experience. Would working on this game provide that given it's age and the level of support they would receive? If what you're offering is "fulfillment" then the candidate would have to share the developer's vision or be able to fulfill their own at the same time. I would guess a large percentage of the people that meet that criteria are already here. Other than those two things, I don't know what else working on this game has to offer. So the very first step would be to identify what currency they do have. For a passion product, any deadlines or schedules are self imposed anyway, so "implementing things faster" might not be as important as just "implementing things." The current rate of updates is pretty impressive as is,.all things considered.

I think it's the type of thing that sorts itself out. Some people would be mortified if their mugshot was on the news, some people don't care. Some people hang out with convicts and some don't. If the original victim violates a rule, ban them too, but the victim's right to know what's going on trumps an offender's right to privacy.

Are you happy with the culture of this subforum? Or would you like it to change?

Are you talking about a character that is Ozzy, just a parody, or someone inspired by him? Ozzy Osbourne is probably a trademark and protected by intellectual property law. Not every person is trademarked, but a lot of celebrities are. Your take on a slurring, debaucherous rockstar with a goth aesthetic and British accent wouldn't violate any laws. That's an expy. If you named him Spazzy Spazbourne, he's a parody. That's all legal, but nobody knows how a GM would interpret them. On it's face, the ToS seems to only prohibit violations of intellectual property law, but those are not widely understood, so I don't know if the application in-game matches that. The typical forum goer response to this sort of thing is often unnecessarily cautious.

What would the fallout of that be?

Oh well that would clear it up. Could you quote that?

I wonder why you stopped there. If white salvage can go, it can all go... because it could all be influence. It's not truly a different currency. Why didn't you just argue to remove the salvage system?

Yes. Right. Great job. That is what is happening. No other way. That's what I said. That's what I meant. You are spot on. You understand it exactly. You're crushing it. Ooh, so close. I expected pushback. In a way, by suggesting something like this, I am inviting it. I'm saying that something people do is stupid. Of course there will be pushback. I just expected the pushback to be about how it's not stupid.