Player funeral ambushed.

[HaemishM]

I've yet to see a ToC that states 'you will take nothing in game personally, nor form binding friendships' , which is what you are suggesting.

It doesn't mean that you shouldn't take anything ingame personally - it means that if you do, and that makes you unhappy, it's basically your own doing and you have yourself to blame.  If you form binding friendships in a video game, with someone you've never met, and you get backstabbed using ingame mechanics - whose fault is that?

Perhaps it is the fault of the backstabber, since he actually makes the effort to stab someone in the back, as opposed to the person who wasn't acting like a complete and total fucking cuntlick.

I mean, if your car was stolen in real life, it's your fault for drving a car, right? Or parking that car in the mall parking lot? BEING THE VICTIM IS FUN!

I cannot express in words just how fucking retarded you are.

[voblat]

Perhaps it is the fault of the backstabber, since he actually makes the effort to stab someone in the back, as opposed to the person who wasn't acting like a complete and total fucking cuntlick.

I mean, if your car was stolen in real life, it's your fault for driving a car, right? Or parking that car in the mall parking lot? BEING THE VICTIM IS FUN!

I cannot express in words just how fucking retarded you are.

having read a few of his diatribes, and responses to various confrontations on this board, i am of the opinion he isn't that retarded.
He is being clever in trying to provoke these reactions, I would guess at some final year college student doing a thesis on internet community within games, or forums, or the like.
Especially as he seems to be posting on an mmo forum, without actually playing any mmo's at all, aside from AC1 of course.

I am of the opinion even in the world we have today, someone so blatantly antisocial would not survive through puberty with enough limbs to operate a keyboard.

[Valmorian]

The mutual agreement is the CoC.  Once we enter the game, that's the binding agreement we've settled upon to arbitrate our interactions with one another.

Huh?  Where is the binding agreement that says "You will not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either."?  I must have missed that, because I don't think I've ever seen it in any terms.

[Telemediocrity]

You have never read a ToC. I can tell that simply because you beleive it to mean normal rules of human interaction do not apply.
90% of any mmo toc is about human interaction and enforcement of said rules.

If you are correct, and normal interaction doesnt apply, why are there rules about foul and abusive language? They are, just so you know, over and above any language filter (which is the legal requirement for age restrictive content)

Because whoever wrote the CoC deemed them to be rules worth including?  This isn't rocket science.  Of course, for PvP worlds, many games loosen the restriction on foul and abusive language.  Why do you think that is?

People have been calling you a sociopath, which I beleive is incorrect, you are socially retarded however, the clue is in the last sentence , in that you genuinely beleive normal rules of human interaction can ever, in any circumstance, be forgotten , when dealing with other people.

What the fuck do you think sadomasochism is?  It's people setting aside normal rules of human interaction (i.e. don't hurt one another) by mutual agreement (i.e. use a 'safe word' to back out).  That's what MMOs are, though on a much lesser scale; tapping into the lesser-but-still-present sadomasochistic impulses (usually more sadistic than masochistic) within each of us by mutual agreement (the CoC) for mutual enjoyment (PvP yay).  Your 'safe word' is that you can exit the game whenever the fuck you like.

What's boxing?  The normal rules of human interaction don't involve punching people in the face.

What's poker?  The normal rules of human interaction don't involve taking someone else's money.

What's spin the bottle?  The normal rules of human interaction (usually) don't involve kissing random strangers.

Games are, and always have been, about temporarily circumventing the laws of human interaction according to a fixed set of rules.

If you clean out your buddy at poker, do you hand all the money back to him at the end?

"But what if losing all that money at poker made him really upset?"

Well, you try to approach that proactively - if you think your buddy is the type of person who'll be upset by that kind of thing, you try and convince him not to play poker, or even refuse to play with him.  But what if it's someone you don't know getting upset at you over PartyPoker for handing them a bad beat that busted them for lots of money?  Do you still have the same responsibility to counsel them on whether or not they should be gambling, or is that the job of their friends, someone who has greater proximity to them?

Games are all about facilitating abnormal, atypical human interaction in some way or another - all games, to a degree, are about escapism.  Some games are focused on the physical aspect, such as boxing, others on the mental aspect, such as poker, still others on getting people to do things their feelings wouldn't normally dictate, such as spin the bottle.

It comes with the territory.

[Miasma]

having read a few of his diatribes, and responses to various confrontations on this board, i am of the opinion he isn't that retarded.
He is being clever in trying to provoke these reactions, I would guess at some final year college student doing a thesis on internet community within games, or forums, or the like.

He has over 7,500 posts at the vault stretching back five years and has apparently been banned from other boards.   As terrifying as it may seem - this really is his true self shining through.  People who are only pretending to be retarded couldn't come up with the shit he does, you need the genuine article.

[voblat]

Because whoever wrote the CoC deemed them to be rules worth including?  This isn't rocket science.  Of course, for PvP worlds, many games loosen the restriction on foul and abusive language.  Why do you think that is?

But you claim we are all mutually agreed 'you will not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either.'. That was your statement. You claim the ToC back you up.
Now a section you admit refers specifically to how you treat other people.If we have all agreed that we wont treat people as real , the language entry uis pointless.
Are you admitting you lied, or just inept at covering your crassness?

You still havent shown the specific part of a ToC that states we wont treat people as real I notice.

What the fuck do you think sadomasochism is?  It's people setting aside normal rules of human interaction (i.e. don't hurt one another) by mutual agreement (i.e. use a 'safe word' to back out).  That's what MMOs are, though on a much lesser scale; tapping into the lesser-but-still-present sadomasochistic impulses (usually more sadistic than masochistic) within each of us by mutual agreement (the CoC) for mutual enjoyment (PvP yay).  Your 'safe word' is that you can exit the game whenever the fuck you like.

You are still implying the ToC , as you stated 'implies you will not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either.'

That is fallacy.

The rest is just the ravings of a troll/psychotically disturbed person.
delete as applicable.

[Telemediocrity]

He has over 7,500 posts at the vault stretching back five years and has apparently been banned from other boards.   As terrifying as it may seem - this really is his true self shining through.

Terrifying... that I treat games as games, and not as some crazy reflection of real life?

Sometimes, people I know in RL might happen by when I'm playing a MMO.  "What are you up to?" they ask. "Killing people in a video game", I reply.  "Oh, fun."

The real world seriously does not give a shit about what people do or don't do in MMOs in the same hysterical way that you do.  There is a good reason for that - the same reason that if you tell someone you won a bunch of money in poker, they don't ask you how the person you took it from felt about it.

But you claim we are all mutually agreed 'you will not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either.'. That was your statement. You claim the ToC back you up.
Now a section you admit refers specifically to how you treat other people.If we have all agreed that we wont treat people as real , the language entry uis pointless.
Are you admitting you lied, or just inept at covering your crassness?

I really hope you didn't graduate from a college with a course in formal logic, because this would be a serious disgrace to their teaching abilities.

A CoC that tells us we don't have to treat people as we would in the real world does not preclude that selfsame CoC establishing many of the same rules as in the real world.

It's a modified ruleset - taking the basic rules of the real world and adding some here, subtracting some there, as the devs see fit.

Nowhere is it implied that it's mutually exclusive, that there's some sort of dichotomy where either all the rules of real world interpersonal interaction apply or none of them do.  Which ones apply?  Whichever ones the devs say so.

[WayAbvPar]

Please do humanity a favor and sterilize yourself.

[voblat]

I really hope you didn't graduate from a college with a course in formal logic, because this would be a serious disgrace to their teaching abilities.

A CoC that tells us we don't have to treat people as we would in the real world does not preclude that selfsame CoC establishing many of the same rules as in the real world.

It's a modified ruleset - taking the basic rules of the real world and adding some here, subtracting some there, as the devs see fit.

Nowhere is it implied that it's mutually exclusive, that there's some sort of dichotomy where either all the rules of real world interpersonal interaction apply or none of them do.  Which ones apply?  Whichever ones the devs say so.

The fallacy is , of course, the ToC doesnt say 'you will not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either'

You can try to insult me all you want, it still wont change the fact no MMO ToC EVER has said that.

My initial point about the language content is those sections of a ToC refer specifically to the 'real person' . That the ToC itself refers to the 'real person' somewhat invalidates your comments.

[Telemediocrity]

Uh, it doesn't have to.  What it says is the extent of the rules.  It establishes a framework.  If that framework makes something possible, then there you have it.  The CoC is there to supercede normal rules of interpersonal interaction.

[voblat]

Uh, it doesn't have to.  What it says is the extent of the rules.  It establishes a framework.  If that framework makes something possible, then there you have it.  The CoC is there to supercede normal rules of interpersonal interaction.

Incorrect. You are projecting a meaning into any given ToC that doesn't exist to justify your asshole behaviour.

You specifically said , earlier in this thread , we all , mutually agree'to not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either'

You CLAIM the ToC actually enforces that.

That is fallacy.

[Telemediocrity]

Uh, it doesn't have to.  What it says is the extent of the rules.  It establishes a framework.  If that framework makes something possible, then there you have it.  The CoC is there to supercede normal rules of interpersonal interaction.

Incorrect. You are projecting a meaning into any given ToC that doesn't exist to justify your asshole behaviour.

You specifically said , earlier in this thread , we all , mutually agree'to not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either'

You CLAIM the ToC actually enforces that.

That is fallacy.

It enforces it by not setting penalties for doing otherwise.  Videogames are almost like authoritarian universes; you're living in someone else's world, and they have the capacity to decide what you can and can't do.

Anything that the devs want to mandate, they can.  Case in point: Toontown - you could build WoW with a Toontown-like chat system if you really wanted to.

[Lantyssa]

Uh, it doesn't have to.  What it says is the extent of the rules.  It establishes a framework.  If that framework makes something possible, then there you have it.  The CoC is there to supercede normal rules of interpersonal interaction.

If it supercedes the rules, then only the bits it specifically states are changed are different than RL norms.  Which means most games expect their users to follow the norms of social interaction.

[voblat]

It enforces it by not setting penalties for doing otherwise.  Videogames are almost like authoritarian universes; you're living in someone else's world, and they have the capacity to decide what you can and can't do.

Anything that the Dev's want to mandate, they can.  Case in point: Toontown - you could build WoW with a Toontown-like chat system if you really wanted to.

Again, you are just projecting the meaning you need to justify behaviour.

For me to 'to not treat people on this game as real people, and they won't treat you as real people either' , it has to specifically tell me not to treat people as real. Not by insinuation.

By your argument here, unless it specifically tells me not to treat people as real, the Devs haven't covered that, so I can.
You argument again falls down at this point, seeing as you stated we all mutually agreed to act this way.

We didn't.
You just need to believe we did to justify yourself.

[Telemediocrity]

If it supercedes the rules, then only the bits it specifically states are changed are different than RL norms.  Which means most games expect their users to follow the norms of social interaction.

I don't think that's what it means; I think what it means is that anything it doesn't box you in on is fair game.

It's like Monopoly; anything the rules don't tell you not to negotiate a deal over, you can.

What this really boils down to is the formal definition of a game - what the 'rules of a game' entail, and what is and isn't outside of the game's scope.  The fact that the games we're talking about are MMOs is relatively incidental - we could just as well be talking about Monopoly.

[Driakos]

It enforces it by not setting penalties for doing otherwise.  Videogames are almost like authoritarian universes; you're living in someone else's world, and they have the capacity to decide what you can and can't do.

"Why did you hack his account and delete his characters?"

"Why did he let me hack him?"


"Why did you scam this player?"

"Why did he let me scam him.  I am role-playing a scamp.  I add excitement to transactions.  There is no specific rule against the exact method I used to bypass this particular aspect of the secure trade window.  I talked him into placing it on the ground.  There is no rule against talking him into placing his items on the ground."


"You are being terminated for an offensive name."

"Why did the game allow me to name myself that?"


"You are being banned for being an asshole to the rest of the playerbase."

"Why did the game allow me to be an asshole?  This is unfair."


I reckon it is naive for people to expect other people to be reasonably decent to each other.  You want open ended systems, but when you look at the rules from that viewpoint, YOU ARE the reason that open ended systems are not being created.

This game has a great ToS/Policy, Kingdom of Loathing - Policies too bad it cannot be used for mainstream games.

Someone around here said a good while ago "We can't have nice things."  Rings true.

[Driakos]

It's like Monopoly; anything the rules don't tell you not to negotiate a deal over, you can.

I would not want to play Monopoly with you either.

[WayAbvPar]

It's like Monopoly; anything the rules don't tell you not to negotiate a deal over, you can.

I would not want to play Monopoly with you either.

I would relish the chance. The second he opened his smarmy know it all college boy yap I could cram my fist down it.

[Morat20]

[I would relish the chance. The second he opened his smarmy know it all college boy yap I could cram my fist down it.

Oh please, you know little shits like that don't do this stuff in Real Life. They're dicks online as overcompensation for their chronic fear and insecurity in real life. It's overcompensation, pure and simple.

[Telemediocrity]

Allow me to respond to your scenarios one by one, since they're all different and require different responses.

"Why did you hack his account and delete his characters?"

"Why did he let me hack him?"

We dealt with this already in the SWG thread.  A player's account is their real life possession - you're violating someone's expectation of property rights in RL, which is genuinely sociopathic.  I've known a few people in RL who scammed accounts, selling them on EBay and then using the original billing info to recall them - and without exception, I can say that they were genuine sociopaths.  They also usually stopped pretty quickly when you contacted their parents and let them know what their kids were up to.

"Why did you scam this player?"

"Why did he let me scam him.  I am role-playing a scamp.  I add excitement to transactions.  There is no specific rule against the exact method I used to bypass this particular aspect of the secure trade window.  I talked him into placing it on the ground.  There is no rule against talking him into placing his items on the ground."

Yes.

"You are being terminated for an offensive name."

"Why did the game allow me to name myself that?"

Rules against offensive naming are generally in the CoC.  If you violate that, you've violated the rules of the game, and you'll be punished accordingly.

"You are being banned for being an asshole to the rest of the playerbase."

"Why did the game allow me to be an asshole?  This is unfair."

If it's in the CoC not to be an asshole, then you shouldn't be one.

[Nebu]

If it's in the CoC not to be an asshole, then you shouldn't be one.

I think this sums it all up. 

If you need to be told to not be an asshole to other people, then anything I/we say here is pointless.

[Lantyssa]

If I ever have influence on the Terms and Conditions of a game that is going to be one of my first ones.

"Welcome to the Lan Online Social Experience Realm.  We have certain expectations to provide our customers with a fun and satisfying experience.  Not following these rules may result in a suspension or ban of your account.  Remember, play nice.

1.  No offensive names.

2.  Don't be an asshole.

3.  If you are, or resemble, Telemediocrity then get the fuck out.  (That one is for you, Lum.)

4.  ..."

[Lum]

having read a few of his diatribes, and responses to various confrontations on this board, i am of the opinion he isn't that retarded.
He is being clever in trying to provoke these reactions, I would guess at some final year college student doing a thesis on internet community within games, or forums, or the like.

He has over 7,500 posts at the vault stretching back five years and has apparently been banned from other boards.   As terrifying as it may seem - this really is his true self shining through.  People who are only pretending to be retarded couldn't come up with the shit he does, you need the genuine article.

He's also stated on those now-banned-from-boards that he was specifically trolling for sport.

Personally, I respond to him when there's something worth responding to that adds value to the thread, and ignore him when he's blatantly trolling for attention. Your mileage may vary.

[Telemediocrity]

[I would relish the chance. The second he opened his smarmy know it all college boy yap I could cram my fist down it.

Oh please, you know little shits like that don't do this stuff in Real Life. They're dicks online as overcompensation for their chronic fear and insecurity in real life. It's overcompensation, pure and simple.

Well, I'd certainly have this conversation with you in real life.

Though I think it's ironic that the people who consider me a 'sociopath' for how I'd play a harmless videogame are talking about threatening RL violence for my opinions as if it's socially acceptable behavior.

[Arthur_Parker]

Just ban him and have done with it.

[Lum]

Though I think it's ironic that the people who consider me a 'sociopath' for how I'd play a harmless videogame are talking about threatening RL violence for my opinions as if it's socially acceptable behavior.

The implication isn't that they are relishing the opportunity to punch you (I would guess) in so much as showing that when there are real-world possible reactions to acting like a complete jackass in a game, people tend not to act like complete jackasses.

When playing said Monopoly game, I highly doubt that you would steal someone's money while they got up to answer the phone, and then when called on it say that there was nothing in the rules against it, and then proceed to throw game pieces around the room at random while eating the hotels.

Yet when online, you aver that this sort of behavior is perfectly acceptable, because people online just don't exist for you - whereas more correctly it's that you are insulated from the consequences of your actions.

The fact that your actions lack consequence is not a feature of the medium, it is a failure of the game.

[WayAbvPar]

The implication isn't that they are relishing the opportunity to punch you (I would guess) in so much as showing that when there are real-world possible reactions to acting like a complete jackass in a game, people tend not to act like complete jackasses.

No reason we can't do both  :-D

[Samwise]

When playing said Monopoly game, I highly doubt that you would steal someone's money while they got up to answer the phone, and then when called on it say that there was nothing in the rules against it, and then proceed to throw game pieces around the room at random while eating the hotels.

Great.  Now I'm going to be randomly chuckling all day and people are going to look at me funny.

[WindupAtheist]

It's the Air Bud Clause.  It lets you get away with anything, provided it's so stupid that nobody bothered to explicitly forbid it.

"Nothing in the rulebook says a dog can't play basketball!"

[Broughden]

Well personally I found the video and the entire episode to be hilarious! Good job to the horde! 

[WindupAtheist]

Alliance was doing the ganking.  Damn noob.

[Strazos]

Just to poke a hole through the CS example on the previous page -

Grefiers are usually Booted by the admins. Sure, being able to TK, or run around and delay the game are "part of the rules", but it's fucking stupid. As such, most people who pull this shit are booted from the server if the admins give a shit at all.

Stupid Fucking Example.

Try again, chucklefuck.

pseudo-edit: Also, your example about people setting aside normal rules of behavior? That's Consensual - you consent to box someone, or put up money in poker, or whatever.

Do you actually read the shit you post, or does it just continue to flow out of that brain of yours at a rate reminiscent of a bad case of dysentery?

[WayAbvPar]

There are good cases of dysentery? That is like having a wee touch of the AIDS.

[shiznitz]

There are good cases of dysentery? That is like having a wee touch of the AIDS.

More like being halfway between HIV- and HIV+.

[Broughden]

Alliance was doing the ganking.  Damn noob.

Really? The video was pretty blurry but it looked like the gank squad was running out of a horde town and toward an alliance area (Loch Modan or Dun Morogh).
Guess I could be wrong though....will have to watch it again.