Bring Story Content in line with Code of Conduct

[Due Regard]

 

5 minutes ago, Psychopithicus said:

So, after taking a peek at the other thread for context, this is what I'm seeing in this situation.

You had no issue with the game's content at first. Then you had a character that was generic'd because something about that character went against Homecoming's Code of Conduct. Now you suddenly have an objection--which you did not have until your character got generic'd--to the CoC applying only to the players and not the game's content as a whole.

Regardless of what the CoC violation even was or whether the GMs were right to generic your character, your overall reaction to having administrative action taken against you really isn't painting you in a sympathetic light here.

Nope, I've had objections to some of the content for a while. I just hadn't taken the time to speak out about them, as it wasn't on my radar.
Then, due to circumstances, it was - and here I am.

Note: this is officially unrelated to any actions the Homecoming team took, as that would be discussing moderation decisions outside of proper channels. I am not here to further break rules, nor encourage others to do so.

[Sakura Tenshi]

44 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Pretty much that... A character that is a Superadine dealer seems reasonable, it is using in-game lore and established canon. It shouldn't be against the Code of Conduct, due to the precedents in the game.
Espousing meth sales, with information on how to purchase said drugs in the bio? Yeah, that's a clear violation - encouraging IRL drug use, RMT transactions, etc... Character gets generic'd.

Then we’re in agreement that the story arcs do not necessarily violate the conduct guidelines than because of differentiation between game-universe and real world?

[Doc_Scorpion]

31 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Then, due to circumstances, it was - and here I am.

21 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Note: this is officially unrelated to any actions the Homecoming team took

My friend you took pains in the first post of the now locked thread to deliberately and intentionally draw a clear and bright line between having actions taken against you and you making objections to in game content.

Please don't treat us as if we lacked reading comprehension and thus misunderstood what you so clearly said.

[Ghost]

I guess the OP could always request a refund, since something within the game offends him 

[Due Regard]

1 hour ago, Sakura Tenshi said:

Then we’re in agreement that the story arcs do not necessarily violate the conduct guidelines than because of differentiation between game-universe and real world?

Not really - RAW, the Code of Conduct would disallow even an in-game reference to drug dealing by player characters. I'm positing that if it is forbidden by the Code of Conduct to players, then it should also NOT be present within the game.

Alternatively, if a player character is only referencing in-game lore, regardless of Code of Conduct violations - it should be allowed to remain, as the precedent is already set by the established universe as being "okay" to portray.

1 hour ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

My friend you took pains in the first post of the now locked thread to deliberately and intentionally draw a clear and bright line between having actions taken against you and you making objections to in game content.
Please don't treat us as if we lacked reading comprehension and thus misunderstood what you so clearly said.

I'm not trying to do so. I'm attempting to make a clearer separation. Even sanitized, it was incorrect for me to bring up the actions of the moderation team in a public setting.

This thread is also on the moderation teams' radar, not the least of which because I directly sent it to their attention to help ensure I was playing by the rules expected. It has not been locked, so take what you will. I was cagey about explicitly stating this because I was not meaning for this to be a public condemnation or critique of Homecoming's moderation team. If I could've edited the OP in the locked thread, I'd've done so.

Regardless of the catalyst that initiated my concern, my point stands: There is a double standard between user-created and in-game content. I advocate that this double standard be removed. As there is a reason I play here, and not on 4chan's server (if it even still lives?), I do not want the Code of Content removed or loosened - ergo, I advocate that the in-game content be brought to the same level of appropriateness.

Also:

1 hour ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

My friend...

Who're you? Please don't devolve into personal attacks via patronizing language. I don't know you, so I don't think we're friends.

Edited Monday at 09:49 PM by Due Regard
Forgot a point.

[Ghost]

17 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Not really - RAW, the Code of Conduct would disallow even an in-game reference to drug dealing by player characters. I'm positing that if it is forbidden by the Code of Conduct to players, then it should also NOT be present within the game.

 

I’m sorry but this makes no sense whatsoever.

The COC is for the players, to make sure we do not ruin the experience or enjoyment for other players.

 

This is quite honestly a ridiculous stretch.

Whatever has you riled up past the point of being a rational person - figure out how to move past it.  Even if that means leaving the game.

 

 

 

 

Edited Monday at 10:04 PM by Ghost

[TheMoneyMaker]

4 hours ago, Ghost said:

Always funny to me when someone gets caught doing something wrong, and then run around trying to point out things others do..

 

Where was this concern for the story content BEFORE you got generic’d?

 

Some people just don't like hypocrisy. If they see official content that would be removed if created by a player, then the rule itself should be questioned. Questioning the rule doesn't mean anything will come of it, but at least pointing out the hypocrisy will be enough to satisfy some.

[TheMoneyMaker]

5 minutes ago, Ghost said:

I’m sorry but this makes no sense whatsoever.

The COC is for the players, to make sure we do not ruin the experience or enjoyment for other players.

 

This is quite honestly a ridiculous stretch.

Whatever has you riled up past the point of being a rational person - figure out how to move past it.  Even if that means leaving the game.

 

 

Code of Conduct is intentionally left to the discretion of those enforcing it, which means that some content might be questionable but allowed because it doesn't really promote something harmful or illegal but acknowledges that such things exist, while other examples might be removed even if it seems less objectionable because one of the GMs feels it could become problematic. The thing is that official content is just that: official. It was approved or sanctioned by the powers that be before the current iteration of the game under Homecoming, and while the Homecoming team's enforcement may be a little more or less heavyhanded at times than the original team, they're not here to rewrite the content of the original team to fit the rules established for Homecoming players.

[Rudra]

39 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Alternatively, if a player character is only referencing in-game lore, regardless of Code of Conduct violations

This is where I have a problem. "Regardless of Code of Conduct violations". A player can make references to in-game lore, any part of it, and still abide by the Code of Conduct. If a player violates the Code of Conduct, then the how or why doesn't matter. For instance, let's take Westin Phipps as an example. He's scum. Anyone who has ever done his arcs know he is scum. Many players, myself included, avoid doing anything for him. However, a player can include in their bio, make a reference as part of his/her/their character name, and even talk about what Westin Phipps does and why without violating the Code of Conduct. As a character name, that character could be Haven House Janitor or whatever. And your bio can talk about how you work for Westin Phipps. And you can RP that you are wandering the Gutter to encourage NPCs to go to Haven House so Phipps can look after them. None of that should be a violation of the Code of Conduct. If however, your character was say True Master of Haven House? That's a problem. If you are out there even just as a character and promoting extremist ideology? Even if just as part of your character concept, that is a problem. I don't know what happened that you got generic'ed. And to be perfectly frank, I don't care. We can play the game, even as despicable scum, without violating the Code of Conduct. No NPC in this game is violating the Code of Conduct to the best of my knowledge. Because of how those NPCs are treated and approach the appropriate topics.

[Skyhawke]

[Luminara]

2 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Just trying to start a dialogue.

 

Oh, you want dialogue.  And here I was thinking this attempt to play rules lawyer was a petulant response to being slapped on the wrist by a GM, as indicated by the thread you started yesterday, which was subsequently locked for... violating the code of conduct.

 

Again.

 

 

Okay, well, from a dialogue perspective, your suggestion is inane.

1. The user agreement, terms of service and code of conduct are applicable to players.  Players, not NPCs.  NPCs have no brains, no free will, no self-determination, no ability to accept or decline and no choice but to do what they're scripted to do and throw the text written for them onto the screen.  They're no more obligated to adhere to the same moral or ethical guidelines that a player does than a bush, or a building, or a rock, or the Talos Island ferry would be.  They are not alive, they are not capable of adapting, they are not in need of constant attention from a team of GMs to prevent them from doing things like filling chat windows with racist comments or sending /tells of a sexual nature to unwilling recipients.  Players require a code of conduct and enforcement of that code because players have the wherewithal to behave in any manner they choose.
2. Villainous NPCs were written to be villainous.  Not mildly off-putting.  Not slightly unethical.  Not faintly untrustworthy.  Not quirky or socially awkward or simply in need of a good lecture.  VILLAINOUS.  We're not pummeling them into unconsciousness for minor mistakes on their 1040's or jaywalking, we're doing it because they're villainous.  They're the bad guys, they say and do bad things.  They bomb buildings.  They take, and sometimes execute, hostages.  They engage in illegal genetic alteration.  They steal, lie, kill, and worse, and that's why we play and are given license to beat them to a pulp.
3. Expecting villainous NPCs to be written according to the standards to which players are held would result in all villainous NPCs being removed from the game, as well as the entirety of City of Villains, because all of that material is outside of the boundaries of acceptable player activity and behavior.  No bank heists to foil, or engage in.  No terrorist plots to dismantle, or conduct.  No Nemesis, no Rikti, no Hellions, no bad guys, no game.  Everything villainous NPCs do violates the basic expectation of player behavior and would result in excision from the game, and the entire half of the game predicated on being a villain.  All that would be left would be Barbie Dress Up With Extra Flashy Lights.
4. You have the option to avoid content which you find objectionable.  If you don't like the way an NPC is written, don't click on that NPC.  If you don't like an action an NPC is asking you to undertake, don't do it.  If you don't want to beat up Nazis, or take down drug dealers, or put the kibosh on the plans of soul-stealing asshats trying to summon a demon, you don't have to.  You can choose not to engage with any content in the game, and that choice exists because it allows people who don't like things to avoid them, rather than requiring the game to be redesigned to fit fifty thousand different moral codes and ethical belief systems which are constantly shifting over time and with political tides.

The very notion that the game should be redesigned in the way you've asked is backwards, short-sighted, destructive, and, honestly, selfish.  It kills the game.  Period.  Regardless of your motivation or intention, it's still the worst possible direction that the game could take because it inevitably leads to its death.  It places egregious restrictions on the people who write for the game, disallowing any semblance of the behaviors, actions or even thoughts which make villainous NPCs villainous, and deprives players of any NPCs with which to interact in the spirit and nature of the game (i.e. issue a beatdown).

 

So there's your dialogue.  It's an abysmal idea and even attempting to peddle it was a mistake.

 

And then trying to justify it by bring up real-world political hot buttons to shame people into agreeing with you so they didn't look callous, and using that psychologically manipulative bullshit as a cover for lashing out because your ego got a boo-boo, you go and act like the very kind of NPC you're campaigning against the game having.

 

You've essentially asked to have yourself written out of Co*.  Well fucking done.

 

1 hour ago, Due Regard said:

You're here in the mud pit with me... Not sitting as high on that horse as you might think.

 

Oh, no, sweet cheeks, you're in it with me.  I live in this mud, you're just something I happened to notice wiggling in it.

 

[macskull]

I am going to once again make the observation that if OP got their wish, almost every piece of content in the game would need to be removed.

[Wavicle]

This has to be trolling.

OP doesn't actually want to remove "objectionable" content from the game, what they want is to be able to write objectionable content in their toon names, or maybe AE stories. This thread is their form of "reverse psychology" to make a point.

I could be wrong, but I wouldn't be shocked if I was right.

[Oubliette_Red]

Sorry, but Han shot first and no amount of editing will change that.

[Starforge]

[Ruin Mage]

Let's entertain this without the assumption that the OP is buttmad at being generic'd:

You are asking volunteer developers to apply the Code of Conduct to the entire game in a narrative sense - to go into files and strip content from the game. A time consuming task AND one that would only open the doors to a whole host of other issues. "Well, you changed the game to remove x y and z because of this 1 poster!!" would snowball into a hell that could not be sealed.

That is not even remotely how Codes of Conduct work. Codes of Conduct are for the players and not for the content of the game. In no game what-so-ever has this ever been different. That is why it uses the word conduct and most if not all CoCs refer to PLAYERS and the content THEY produce. This means in-game chat, names, and whatever else they themselves write up.

You are confusing Codes of Conduct, in some scenario where you are being serious about this, with something else. You would have had more of a leg to stand on if you tried to leverage the game's ESRB rating. Which, shocker, would have been equally dismantled but at least it would have made a little more sense.

To make it absolutely clear once again:
CoCs and EULAs apply to the players, not in-game content.

Edited Tuesday at 12:44 AM by Ruin Mage

[CellyEl]

I wanna know what name he had, tbh. See what bullshit he's dying on this hill over.

[PresidentDSG]

I just want to say that the prohibition against real world crime doesn't mean "Burglary is a thing that happens in the real world, so you can't depict villains stealing things." It means you can't use the content to discuss, plan, etc actual real world crimes being committed right now.

[Due Regard]

3 hours ago, macskull said:

I am going to once again make the observation that if OP got their wish, almost every piece of content in the game would need to be removed.

Yup. Kinda ludicrous, isn't it?
 

56 minutes ago, PresidentDSG said:

I just want to say that the prohibition against real world crime doesn't mean "Burglary is a thing that happens in the real world, so you can't depict villains stealing things." It means you can't use the content to discuss, plan, etc actual real world crimes being committed right now.

Amazing, someone who understands what that part is intended for, and why a character advertising themselves as an IRL drug dealer would be against the Code of Conduct, but one who's just dealing with in-game lore might not be (or shouldn't be, personally).

Amusing, also, just how many posts are attacking my mistaken original post, without any substance beyond that.
  

3 hours ago, Wavicle said:

This has to be trolling.
OP doesn't actually want to remove "objectionable" content from the game, what they want is to be able to write objectionable content in their toon names, or maybe AE stories. This thread is their form of "reverse psychology" to make a point.
I could be wrong, but I wouldn't be shocked if I was right.

 

Partially correct - I'm not actually advocating for sanitizing of content to match the Code of Conduct. A far more reasonable stance would be to relax the Code of Conduct so that it is enforced to the same level of maturity that the game itself has.

I do think Lt. Harris' arc is inappropriate in general, and even more so as a lowbie arc - enough that I've only ran it twice - once on Legacy for the new content, and once on HC for the toon I was trying to do ALL content with.

Edited Tuesday at 03:05 AM by Due Regard

[Psychopithicus]

12 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

Amazing, someone who understands what that part is intended for, and why a character advertising themselves as an IRL drug dealer would be against the Code of Conduct, but one who's just dealing with in-game lore might not be (or shouldn't be, personally).

Amusing, also, just how many posts are attacking my mistaken original post, without any substance beyond that.

 

The more posts you make like this, the more convinced I am that my cynicism regarding your original intentions was justified.

 

It has been civilly explained to you several times over why your proposal will not happen. You have repeatedly ignored these posts in favor of defending your position no matter how illogical your reasoning becomes.  Any legitimacy your claims may have had are rapidly losing credibility in this matter, and you have brought people's "attacks" on yourself because they've run out of patience for your sheer fucking obstinance.

 

Do yourself a favor and quit while you're behind.

[keyguardactive]

Okay, so what you actually want is a relaxed code of conduct, and you're trying to make that thread without making that thread. 

 

This is a very silly over-reaction, but taking the topic at face value: No. The code of conduct is a set of rules to keep player behavior between the navigational buoys. I don't know for certain, but I bet all the money in my pockets against all the money in your pockets that there's a version of the code of conduct for the developers. And, because they're not just some joe off the street, their rules are more relaxed than ours, because they're in a position of trust. 

 

The player code of conduct does not, and should not, apply to content put in by either the OG developers or the Homecoming developers. 

[Rudra]

35 minutes ago, Due Regard said:

 

Partially correct - I'm not actually advocating for sanitizing of content to match the Code of Conduct. A far more reasonable stance would be to relax the Code of Conduct so that it is enforced to the same level of maturity that the game itself has.

 

5 hours ago, Due Regard said:

 I do not want the Code of Content removed or loosened

You need to decide on what position you intend to hold. Because right now? You're talking out your ass with your both sides of the debate stance. You can't both want the Code of Conduct upheld as is and have it relaxed at the same time.

[GM Impervium]

You left out a very important line in the section you quoted, probably because it dismantles your entire argument Correction, please heed the following in the section you quoted: "(Yes, we know City of Villains exists)". That's to prevent this exact (bad faith) argument from being made.

 

The game content is held to a different standard, because it's made by a team of people writing missions, and it all had to go through a vetting and editorial process. But a single player making the decision to be edgy has no such guardrails.

I know you were encouraged to re-make the thread after removing the parts we initially found problematic, however, this thread is straying further and further from the stated objective of tackling objectionable content, so...

 

Edited Tuesday at 04:20 AM by GM Impervium
I didn't see the CoV line in the OP before, appologies!