Proposal for a new command: /timeout

[Oklahoman]

2 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

How about a command that puts you n touch with a therapist that is covered by your insurance to help you figure out why you don't get along with strangers on the internet?

 

It's much more complicated than that. Unless you have a specific partnership with something like BetterHelp, then you are probably looking at interfacing somehow with PsychologyToday. Then, you're talking about a pretty narrow filter - show me all therapists licensed in the state I am currently in, available now, who accept my insurance. Honestly, PsychologyToday even struggles with that, because therapists themselves, by and large, are usually not very technical. Rather than take down a profile or flip a switch to say they are no longer accepting new clients, they are more likely to simply include as part of their intro statement "***NOT ACCEPTING NEW CLIENTS***" and how do you code for that? Some seem to have forgotten they even have a monthly subscription to PsychologyToday, as evidenced by the listed contact info not working at all.

 

You may not be aware of the therapist shortage we have right now, so getting into see a therapist may not be possible for weeks or even months. A lot of therapists are having to turn away client right now. Depending on how urgent your need is, you may not be able to tolerate a delay in seeking treatment. So, now we need to consider if an inpatient stay is appropriate, in which case this whole command really needs to refer you to your closest ER for evaluation, or maybe the new 988 service.

 

Assuming you've managed all of that, now you are looking for a therapist with training in your specific age group, and this supposed problem you have with getting along with strangers on the internet. Quite honestly, I'm not aware of any specific diagnoses in the DSM related to "not getting along with strangers on the internet" so there's not a lot of call for training to be available. You could round that up, I suppose, to a larger addiction, but maybe it's just an adjustment disorder of some kind. Now, you are overtreating the client, which is unethical. Really, without a full intake and assessment you don't know if you are talking about the psychological equivalent of a cold or something more serious.

 

Anywho, I'd guess the implementation of something like that is a lot more difficult than what's being suggested here, otherwise I'd totally go for your suggestion.

 

-Oklahoman, LPC

[UltraAlt]

32 minutes ago, Oklahoman said:

Why? When there are hundreds of people online

Server - Online

Torchbearer - 92

Excelsior - 553

Indomitable - 74

Everlasting - 273

Reunion - 100

 

You might say that Excelsior is "hundreds"

It's pushing it to say Everlasting is "hundreds".

The other servers? Definitely not.

 

36 minutes ago, Oklahoman said:

why do I need to know that your DFB is 5/8, 6/8, 7/8...?

 

I don't care if you don't want to see a DFB, Posi 1, Posi 2, Yin, Citadel, Moonfire, or Hess teams forming.

 

I don't want to see Endgame, farming, door-sitting, and speed-taskforce spam, but I have to deal with it, and I don't complain about it.

 

Other people are playing the game. Deal with it.

[lemming]

I would love a more robust chat interface that I could just run regex rules on.

[TheZag]

If they add a room that puts a NPC copy of the /timeout player in the corner for the duration of their timeout,  you have my vote.

 

[Yomo Kimyata]

51 minutes ago, Oklahoman said:

 

It's much more complicated than that. Unless you have a specific partnership with something like BetterHelp, then you are probably looking at interfacing somehow with PsychologyToday. Then, you're talking about a pretty narrow filter - show me all therapists licensed in the state I am currently in, available now, who accept my insurance. Honestly, PsychologyToday even struggles with that, because therapists themselves, by and large, are usually not very technical. Rather than take down a profile or flip a switch to say they are no longer accepting new clients, they are more likely to simply include as part of their intro statement "***NOT ACCEPTING NEW CLIENTS***" and how do you code for that? Some seem to have forgotten they even have a monthly subscription to PsychologyToday, as evidenced by the listed contact info not working at all.

 

You may not be aware of the therapist shortage we have right now, so getting into see a therapist may not be possible for weeks or even months. A lot of therapists are having to turn away client right now. Depending on how urgent your need is, you may not be able to tolerate a delay in seeking treatment. So, now we need to consider if an inpatient stay is appropriate, in which case this whole command really needs to refer you to your closest ER for evaluation, or maybe the new 988 service.

 

Assuming you've managed all of that, now you are looking for a therapist with training in your specific age group, and this supposed problem you have with getting along with strangers on the internet. Quite honestly, I'm not aware of any specific diagnoses in the DSM related to "not getting along with strangers on the internet" so there's not a lot of call for training to be available. You could round that up, I suppose, to a larger addiction, but maybe it's just an adjustment disorder of some kind. Now, you are overtreating the client, which is unethical. Really, without a full intake and assessment you don't know if you are talking about the psychological equivalent of a cold or something more serious.

 

Anywho, I'd guess the implementation of something like that is a lot more difficult than what's being suggested here, otherwise I'd totally go for your suggestion.

 

-Oklahoman, LPC

 

I figured this would also be a great way to add thousands of new players.  Could you imagine how incredibly useful this service could be to so many people who are desperately in need of help?

[Oklahoman]

We're veering off topic a bit with this - but this is in response to the notion that someone "needs" to post to LFG more than once a minute because their team is filling up fast.

 

43 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

You might say that Excelsior is "hundreds"

It's pushing it to say Everlasting is "hundreds".

The other servers? Definitely not.

 

Taken at noon central time on a Monday, and understanding player counts are higher in the evenings, and I refuse to argue over the definition of "hundreds" or the intent of what I said. This practice is "spamming" and is pointed out in conduct guideline #3, as alluded to by a GM in the linked post at the top of the thread. There's no hard and fast criteria for what is "spamming" and in an ideal world we wouldn't need one. Somehow, I suspect we will get to argue about it pretty quickly, though.

 

To the larger point, this is just 1 example of why someone may want to temporarily ignore another player, so let's not get hung up on it. Even if we fully agreed on what "spamming" is there are numerous other reasons why someone may temporarily want to ignore someone, even - I suspect - on Indominable with all 74 of it's players right now.

 

[Luminara]

5 hours ago, Yomo Kimyata said:

How about a command that puts you n touch with a therapist that is covered by your insurance to help you figure out why you don't get along with strangers on the internet?

 

Beating things into quivering gelatinous stains is therapy.

 

What I need therapy for is the rage I experience when my best attacks miss every... damn... time... I... use... them...

 

Miss!  Forced hit!  Miss!  Forced hit!  Miss!  Forced hit!  Mi- OHYOUMISERABLECOCKGARGLINGSHITBAGMOTHERFUCKERAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

 

[Oklahoman]

2 hours ago, Luminara said:

What I need therapy for is the rage I experience when my best attacks miss every... damn... time... I... use... them...

 

I've said before that I sound like a needy customer at a restaurant with a bad waitress. "Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss."

[UltraAlt]

6 hours ago, Oklahoman said:

This practice is "spamming" and is pointed out in conduct guideline #3, as alluded to by a GM in the linked post at the top of the thread.

 

No. Posting that your team is filing is not spamming. Posting that your team has filled is not spam.

 

Posting the same message several times a minute for a team that isn't filling is spamming.

Posting again simply because you think your message has scrolled off the screen is spamming.

 

But I think you are Excelsior and people chat on /LFG over there, so it's a moot point to complain about people posting that they are looking for LF2M and then posting that the team is filled 20-30 seconds later.

 

Spam is also setting up a macro so that every time you use your power a message goes out in (worst case scenario) /say.

 

I don't think you understand what spamming is.

So there is no need to discuss this with you any further.

 

 

[Bionic_Flea]

6 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

So there is no need to discuss this with you any further.

I agree.

[Oklahoman]

49 minutes ago, UltraAlt said:

I don't think you understand what spamming is.

 

We'll agree to disagree then, though I think I've got some GM guidance on this one. Perhaps not.

 

Regardless, I stand behind the proposal to be able to temporarily ignore someone for any reason as stated in the original post.

Edited August 2, 2022 by Oklahoman
clarity