TS Logs
<21:28:09> "Kashya Vulano": That's him; ready to move him in here?
<21:28:53> "Elsy": yep go ahead
<21:29:37> "Elsy": >.>
<21:29:44> "Kashya Vulano": INSUFFICIENT PERMISSIONS.
<21:30:00> "smirkybeard billbong": knock
<21:30:25> "Elsy": Wait you had insufficent permissions?
<21:30:25> "Raccoonism": Greetings
<21:30:30> "Elsy": Also sorry none of us talk.
<21:30:38> "Raccoonism": My mic is terribad.
<21:30:43> "smirkybeard billbong": no i was setting up mic but apparently it doesnt matter
<21:30:56> "Alijham": ill prob talk
<21:31:06> "Alijham": il multitasking so its much easier
<21:31:08> "Elsy": Mkay then we can wait if you wanna set up.
<21:31:12> "Kashya Vulano": And, eyah.
<21:31:18> "Kashya Vulano": *Yeah, even
<21:31:20> "smirkybeard billbong": it's KINDA night time here rn so i wouldnt be able to talk much anyways
<21:31:36> "Elsy": ok whatever works for you
<21:32:23> "smirkybeard billbong": whatever works for me infact but lets just type seeing how everyone can type but not everyone can use their mics apparently
<21:33:04> "Elsy": Alright then, can you tell us why you're here to get everyone on the same page?
<21:34:18> "smirkybeard billbong": Right. Hold up.
<21:34:22> "Elsy": ok
<21:36:16> "smirkybeard billbong": Right. Not a long while ago I've recieved two strikes for a certain incident. Which were: "Disrespectful Comment/s in Guild Chat/ Overtly Sexual Comments in RP" and "Disrespectful dialogue with an officer". Or so said to me Raccoonism during out talk. Infact, I straight up c/p'ed the reasons.
<21:37:58> "smirkybeard billbong": Apparently the sexual comment in RP was my character using a rather common insult "cocksucker". And the only reason it was sexual only because it had word "cock" in it. Which I personally believe is especially ridiculous and when I was accussed of such by Elsy, I pointed out that it was ridiculous.
<21:38:10> "Raccoonism": If I vanish, it's my internet resetting FYI
<21:38:10> "smirkybeard billbong": To explain the 'Disrespectful dialogue with an officer'.
<21:38:40> "smirkybeard billbong": So my concern is:
<21:38:43> "smirkybeard billbong": What in the world was that?
<21:40:09> "smirkybeard billbong": Oh, let's not forget the "Disrespectful Comment/s in Guild Chat" which I might've done, but I cannot remember any individual incident where I was, well, disrespectful in guild chat.
<21:41:17> "Alijham": It was just a small thing. Considerinf we are not an 18+ guild, we try to be sensitive to everyone around us as we have people of all ages in the guild. That was a very miniscule problem, the real issue there was the way you responded to the notice of it.
<21:42:55> "smirkybeard billbong": If it's a small thing, then why I got a strike for it still? It was just an insult. A very common one, at that. Can't we swear now?
<21:43:01> "Elsy": Actually, I'd like to say, the two strikes I gave were specifically for "disrespectul dialogue with an officer." Which was probably a miscommunication on our end for telling you different things. Though in our officer incident reports I do state that I intended not to do much beyond give a warning, until the attitude that was given, which was mostly passive agressive in nature, warrented the strikes. I have screenshots of the two conversations in question if you'd like to review them.
<21:43:28> "Alijham": Yes, the problem was not that it was the way you responded oocly to an officer asking you to not use that language and why.
<21:43:48> "Alijham": You got a strike for the ooc disrespect, not the comment ic.
<21:44:09> "Raccoonism": The comment ic just caused the warning to be issued
<21:46:21> "smirkybeard billbong": What made you believe it was passive aggressive? Only because I disagreed? Look, the main issue was about said officer trying to push my character calling somebody a cocksucker under "Overtly Sexual Comments in RP". It's like you completely ignored the context and you did that while being in the same location as my character, Elsy.
<21:46:51> "smirkybeard billbong": Even if my friend would've accussed me of this, I'd call it ridiculous. Because it is.
<21:48:15> "smirkybeard billbong": Whenever I would have friends that'd do that is another thing, ofcourse.
<21:48:39> "Ellix": You were given a warning (not a strike) because you were skirting the edge of breaking one of the rules you agreed to follow when you joined the guild.
<21:48:46> "Alijham": Again, we try to be sensitive and considerate of everyone else around us.
<21:49:16> "Ellix": We have the same rules for everyone, and they've always been the same. The officer was just letting you know that you were toeing the line.
<21:49:23> "Elsy": No, if you had something along the lines of, "I disagree with that rule, I'd like to challenge that," it'd be fine with it. It was your phrasing, disrespect, and taking me as a joke that warrented the strike.
As for the actual thing that set off the warning, which again is not why you have the strike, context or not "cock" is still sexual when used as an insult. As you are infering someone is sucking someone's genitalia. It is listed as a rule that genitalia are not to be mentioned in public chat. And so "cocksucka" is an offense.
Though I'd like to reiterate, that this is not why you have the strike.
<21:49:55> "Raccoonism": It was not the disagreeing but the words you chose to argue that disagreement. For instance, using assumptions and sarcastic remarkes.
For instance
"Would you rather make people feel uncorfortable instead?" It is a very condecending question that adds nothing to the issue being discussed.
<21:50:14> "Elsy": Alright guys give Tsala a sec to answer
<21:50:18> "Elsy": We're spamming
<21:50:26> "Raccoonism": sorry, I'm slow withthe typing.
<21:53:15> "Pheenie" pokes you: knock-knock-knock
<21:53:25> "Alijham": im going to switch to computer sec
<21:53:36> You poked "Pheenie" with message: Sorry, private convo. Member behavioral stuff.
<21:54:02> You poked "Pheenie" with message: I'll move up there when we're done.
<21:54:10> "Pheenie" pokes you: Kay, Imma blast music and have a dance party
<21:54:22> You poked "Pheenie" with message: Have fun!
<21:54:41> You poked "Alijham" with message: QUICK BEFORE YOU MISSSSSS THINGS
<21:57:56> "smirkybeard billbong": I've been constantly poked in the eye for saying one "bad" thing or another. I wouldn't call that very considerate, but that is up your judgement, I suppose. And Elsy you seem to largerly mistake me taking your warning as a joke and taking YOU as a joke in general. Honestly, if somebody I know would've told me the same thing, I would take it as a joke. Would I take them as a joke? Why would I?
Reason why I called it ridiculous was well explained by Elsy just now. You claim that this guild is expected to be 18+, yet you have this incredibly silly approach when it comes to sexual content. Heck, it isn't even sexual. Do you really think that 18 folk don't know what a cock is?
Sure I might sound sarcastic and condecending. But can you not understand how downright comedic topic is? I sadly find an issue taking this serious.
<21:58:16> "smirkybeard billbong": I mean I still do, but I had this issue when I talked to Elsy about it the first time.
<21:58:26> "Alijham": I said that the guild is not 18+. I specifically said that.
<21:58:44> "smirkybeard billbong": What is it, then? Ten and on?
<21:58:51> "Elsy": Actually, yeah kinda.
<21:58:55> "Alijham": ^
<21:58:55> "Elsy": We have no age limit.
<21:59:03> "smirkybeard billbong": Why?
<21:59:08> "Elsy": Which is why we have rules on the stuff.
<21:59:16> "Kashya Vulano": I'm going to have to side with Tsala on this one. While the inquiry upon the warning may have been abrasive, I hardly find that justifiable enough for a strike. I have had to deal with abrasive, agitated people in the past on the Guild Chat when calling them out for things that actually do ride the line OOC (such as sexism and racism) but I don't strike them for their response; it's reasonable that they would be agitated. Despite this, I think it'd be good to note the fact that when someone is being that abrasive, it's often due to them having a major disagreement on the way things are run, which means it *may* be apt to bring up in discussion. Personally, I find Tsala's argument justifiable; if people can describe their gore RP, (Taking into account, for example, Shadow's rather passionate display of beating Deanja's head in with a spiked club while
<21:59:17> "Kashya Vulano": her brain matter, skull fragments, and eyes scatter everywhere), then I think a little insult is completely fine. I think people would find heavy gore *much* more traumatizing than a minor insult.
<21:59:54> "Alijham": The insult was not the problem, like I said before.
<21:59:57> "Raccoonism": Kashya, the strike was for the reponse to the warning, not the sexual issue.
<22:00:00> "Kashya Vulano": And I understand that.
<22:00:11> "Kashya Vulano": The thing I'm getting at *is* his response.
<22:00:14> "Raccoonism": The Sexual issue is a completly different topic
<22:00:27> "smirkybeard billbong": Not at all.
<22:00:44> "Elsy": Yes yes we have two topics here.
He can challenge his strikes for the warning which is one topic. He can challenge the "ridiculousness" of the rule, which is another topic.
<22:00:48> "smirkybeard billbong": This is the topic I had with Elsy that she found disrespectful, apparently.
<22:00:49> "Alijham": It is, in face, a completely different topic. We are talking about your tone in response to these issues.
<22:00:54> "Raccoonism": concerning the strikes, it is a different topic.
It may be the reason for the response, but the response itself was the issue.
<22:01:01> "Elsy": ^
<22:01:47> "Elsy": So we have two topics as I outlined. Which do we handle first?
<22:01:47> "smirkybeard billbong": The response became the issue only because you assumed it was passive aggressive or whanot.
<22:02:08> "Raccoonism": We all observed it to be, so yes.
<22:02:12> "Raccoonism": that is the issue.
<22:02:21> "Elsy": Which I suppose is why we're here. To see if officers agree if it's passive agressive or not.
<22:02:26> "Ellix": It seemed disproportionate and disrespectful.
<22:02:30> "Alijham": I agree.
<22:02:30> "Elsy": If you'd like we can take a poll.
<22:02:37> "smirkybeard billbong": Only seemed, sure.
<22:02:49> "smirkybeard billbong": Oh come on. A poll?
<22:02:57> "Alijham": Well, we can't say, "I know it is passive aggressive" because that's an opinion.
<22:03:07> "Elsy": ^Which is why we're asking multiple people here.
<22:03:07> "Ellix": Well, you can't really decide how others are going to take your words. You just do your best to come across as you intend.
<22:03:21> "Elsy": Aye, and we ask others when there are discrepencies
<22:03:27> "Kashya Vulano": Passive-aggressive or not, he clearly expressed concern. That's reason enough to reconsider giving him a "strike."
<22:03:44> "Elsy": Kashya
<22:03:49> "Kashya Vulano": Yes?
<22:03:53> "Elsy": That's why we're here. >.>
<22:03:57> "Elsy": To reconsider.
<22:04:15> "Elsy": Analyze and get multiple opinions.
<22:04:24> "Kashya Vulano": I understand that. It just seems as though everybody seems a bit closed-for-discussion on this, I think.
<22:04:41> "Raccoonism": Can you clarify Kaysha?
<22:05:25> "smirkybeard billbong": You lot are dead sure that I was passive aggressive, when me trying to disrespect Elsy wasn't the goal at all.
<22:05:33> "Kashya Vulano": I'm not trying to be disrespectful, as such. And, likewise, this could just be my impression. It just seems as though nobody really has a desire to listen to both sides. Again, though, that's just from *my* point of view
<22:05:38> "Alijham": Personally, it doesn't seem to me that Silky realizes that he's being as disrespectful as he is. It's just perhaps the way he expresses himself when he's distressed, which I understand, but he also has to be sensitive to the situation and be able to be aware of what he's saying.
<22:05:39> "smirkybeard billbong": To the point it makes me believe that discussing this bit is pointless.
<22:06:04> "Raccoonism": Should I link the conversation?
<22:06:18> "Alijham": It doesn't seem like his intent was to disrespect anyone at all, but whether he meant to or not, that's how it was taken.
<22:06:19> "Raccoonism": so we have more context here?
<22:06:34> "Kashya Vulano": I've read it several times; nevertheless, it may do good if somebody hasn't read it yet.
<22:06:50> "Alijham": I'd say link it
<22:06:52> "Kashya Vulano": ^
<22:07:09> "smirkybeard billbong": I might've been annoyed, sure. Because it was time when I didn't sleep to well and when Elsy warned me was me being especially exhausted. But did I go overboard with it? I highly doubt it.
<22:07:30> "Raccoonism": I agree Ali
However, disagreeing in that tone is a poor way to express an opinion.
<22:07:36> "Alijham": I agree.
<22:07:51> "Raccoonism": ANd unless that is rectified, nothing will change.
<22:08:01> "Alijham": It would have been completely different if you had simply said, "I disagree, and here is why," rather than taking the stand that you did.
<22:08:04> "Elsy": *is digging for links 1 sec*
<22:08:05> "WildCat800": I have read it a few times, and the tone comes off as disrespectful. Yes, everyone can state a concern but it is how the concern was stated that I think the problem is
<22:08:11> "Alijham": ^
<22:08:38> "Elsy": Two convos in question
#1 http://imgur.com/a/Psxu0
#2 http://imgur.com/a/HdtqP
<22:08:42> "Elsy": There, for anyone who needs it.
<22:09:03> "Kashya Vulano": I personally don't find it all that abrasive; he was expressing direct concern, but he wasn't going off-the-wall with his disagreement.
<22:09:30> "Ellix": I felt like it was pretty condecening and rude.
<22:09:42> "Ellix": My oppinion.
<22:09:52> "Ellix": wow I can spell, I promise
<22:09:56> "Kashya Vulano": xD
<22:09:56> "Elsy": Well we can ask everyone in here, and if the majority finds it passable, we can excuse the strikes, yes?
<22:10:15> "smirkybeard billbong": ah i partially forgot about that veteran furry thing
<22:10:15> "Elsy": I can refrain from voting.
<22:10:21> "Elsy": As I was involved.
<22:11:11> "WildCat800": that sounds fair
<22:11:12> "Raccoonism": Only on the condition that Tsla understands how they comminucated needs to be improved on.
Otherwise, nothing will change.
<22:11:19> "Elsy": ^Aye that's true
<22:11:23> "Alijham": I feel like in the vet furry convo he wasn't being as abrasive as in the other, and he was just frustrated and trying to defend himself. So that one could or should be excused if he just pays a little more mind to his tone later on. The second one, though, I think is a definite strike.
<22:11:27> "Raccoonism": Otherwise, I vote to uphold the strikes.
<22:12:06> "WildCat800": I can agree with ali
<22:12:23> "Elsy": So then 1 for no strikes, 2 for one strike, 1 for both strikes.
<22:12:26> "Elsy": Bhi and Ellix?
<22:12:28> "Alijham": I think we can definitely knock one off if he agrees to be a little more mindful of himself, even if he didn't mean it to come off that way. We've all got to be respectful and mindful of one another.
<22:12:50> "Elsy": Agreed, and I have no issues if it can be approved upon.
<22:12:55> "Raccoonism": ^
<22:13:11> "Ellix": I agree with Ali. I'd vote to remove one if he is able to understand what needs to change.
<22:13:13> "Alijham": That's the majority so far, one strike if promised improvement.
<22:13:24> "Elsy": Bhi are you AFK?
<22:13:33> "Bhidul": sorta
<22:13:39> "Elsy": Do you want to vote?
<22:13:46> "Bhidul": ye
<22:13:50> "Bhidul": I'm for removing a strike
<22:14:25> "smirkybeard billbong": Yeah, i was just looking over the linked logs.
<22:14:47> "Elsy": Alright then, we will remove one strike if you can agree to improving. What needs to be done to be considered "improved," officers?
<22:15:24> "Alijham": I think the rhetorical questions are one of the main things that make what you're trying to express sound disrespectful, even if you might not mean it to some off that way. Rhetorical questions are a big no-no.
<22:15:57> "Ellix": Just in general, recognizing how he's coming off, and agreeing to be more mindful of it in the future.
<22:16:08> "smirkybeard billbong": I suppose the second one could come off rude. As said, I wasn't exactly all up for being polite and mindful considering my state at that time.
<22:16:25> "Elsy": I think it would be helpful to him if we're more specific, Ellix, as otherwise he won't know.
<22:16:29> "Alijham": That's totally understandable as long as you make a point to be more mindful of it in the future.
<22:16:49> "Ellix": But you expect us to have basic respect for you, right?
<22:16:53> "Raccoonism": Rhetorical questions are a good example of passive agressive comments in a disagreement.
I suggest simply taking a step away from a disagreement or situation when you find yourself in a bad way Tsal.
Keep it out of game as much as possible.
<22:17:04> "Alijham": And if you do slip up like that again, I would make it another point to apologize after the incedent and clarify you didn't mean to come off that way.
<22:17:16> "Elsy": Ok give Tsal a sec guys.
<22:18:57> "smirkybeard billbong": Not to make it sound like I'm trying to blame someone else for my own mistake, but why didn't you say that the way I talked to you made you, well, uncomfortable? Things would've went better if you make a remark about it.
<22:19:23> "smirkybeard billbong": made*
<22:20:00> "smirkybeard billbong": Again, not trying to make it sound as if I'm trying to blame Elsy for all this now.
<22:22:19> "Elsy": You're right, at any point I could have definitely said, "I'm uncomfortable," or something along those lines. That was on me, and that would helped the situation. I suppose I myself was begining to feel defensive, I felt like with your rhetorical questions, I was reading them in ways that made me feel like you were mad at me, you weren't taking me seriously, and you had no general concern for what I was trying to say.
And so I sort of shrunk back. Which is a point for me to work on, and something I can try to improve.
Because you're right in the point that, you're not going to know unless I communicate it. And that's totally fair.
<22:22:23> "Raccoonism": Having that bit of clarity from the other person can help, as I assume you didn't intend this with malice, just inflience from a bad mood.
What can happen, is I suggest to the other officers, and myself, to let tell you if you are coming off abrassive to us as calmly as possible and to simply ask if something is wrong.
Is that agreeable?
I think it might curb this from ever getting this far in the future.
<22:22:59> "Alijham": ^^^^
<22:23:22> "WildCat800": agreed
<22:23:29> "Elsy": Agreed.
<22:24:52> "smirkybeard billbong": Think that should be used when talking to people in general. That is, when their response might appear more or less hostile. Could prevent misunderstandings of this sort.
<22:24:54> "smirkybeard billbong": So yeah, I agree.
<22:25:00> "Raccoonism": The reason passive agressivness is so poisonous in discussion is that it automatically puts the other on the defensive.
<22:25:11> "Alijham": ^
<22:25:39> "Raccoonism": which can quickly much up an otherwise good debate.
<22:25:44> "Raccoonism": muck*
<22:26:52> "Raccoonism": And Agreed Smirky. This can apply in the day to day with people. It certainly would make some work more enjoyable.
<22:29:54> "Elsy": Anyhow, now that the strikes are settled, did you want to discuss the rules reguarding the sexual vs gore/graphic stuff? We can review them, discuss, vote, and change them as necessary.
<22:30:18> "smirkybeard billbong": That was my main concern, yeah.
<22:30:26> "Kashya Vulano": I wouldn't mind discussing it further. o3o
<22:30:45> "smirkybeard billbong": Since me having strikes or not doesn't stop me from roleplaying.
<22:30:46> "Raccoonism": Agreed
<22:30:52> "Elsy": Alright then, so, your concern is why sexual insults are not allowed but violence is, right?
<22:34:08> "smirkybeard billbong": KIND of. It's not that I am trying to have gore restricted, it's just that it feels like it's everywhere, so to speak. As Kashya previously mentioned, you can have a guy turn the half of someone's head into a brain puree, but mentioning a genitalia is worth a warning. But before that, to make sure. So BSR isn't exactly 18+, but has no age limit?
<22:34:33> "Elsy": Nope, it is /not/ 18+
<22:34:50> "Elsy": And there is no minimum age for joining.
<22:35:27> "Elsy": (Granted the game is technically M for mature, which is why we didn't put a minimum age, but not everyone in guild is 18+. In fact a lot aren't.)
<22:35:31> "Raccoonism": I agree with Smirky on that.
Recently there has been an abundance of over-the-top with gore.
<22:35:40> "Alijham": I agree, it's been kind of bothersome to me.
<22:35:47> "Elsy": Admittedly I haven't been around to see it. "l
<22:35:49> "Elsy": *:l
<22:35:54> "Kashya Vulano": Well uh
<22:35:55> "Raccoonism": It has been nearly every night
<22:36:04> "Alijham": I definately feel like sexual things should be treated more harshly than violence, though.
<22:36:20> "Alijham": Violence is just a part of RP and the game, you can't avoid it.
<22:36:26> "Raccoonism": Also agree on that, concidering you can face IRL prison time for some offenses.
<22:36:31> "smirkybeard billbong": Do you know the age rating for this game?
<22:36:33> "Kashya Vulano": Eh, I'm just not sure. Maybe in terms of ERP, but smirky was simply maintaining an insult.
<22:37:02> "Raccoonism": If we are to stick strickly to known insults, we should focus on that.
<22:37:22> "Raccoonism": as that seems to be the actual concern/conflict with the rule
<22:37:24> "Alijham": The age rating is 17+, but that goes just as strictly to rater R movies, Tsal.
<22:37:44> "Elsy": 18+ is the game's technical rating, though there are a lot of guildies that are under 18. Again, which is why we're really touchy on sex in public chats.
<22:37:47> "Alijham": If the guardian is fine with whomever is purchasing it and playing it that is under 17, that's cool and dandy.
<22:38:24> "smirkybeard billbong": Well. One thing is sex, another thing is mention of genitalia. It being part of our body.
<22:38:41> "Elsy": Aye, we have it listed that mention of genitalia in public chats is not allowed.
<22:38:56> "Elsy": We were having issues with it earlier, where some were saying it and making others uncomfortable.
<22:39:05> "Elsy": Which is why the rule exists now.
<22:39:32> "Elsy": Though we can look at specifically sexual insults and see how that fits within our rules.
<22:39:32> "Raccoonism": Mainly Penis, cock, dick, vag, cunt, things of the more extreme nature in the context of sex.
<22:39:36> "Elsy": ^
<22:39:57> "smirkybeard billbong": Well, Tsal called others cunts before.
<22:40:12> "Elsy": I've not been around to see it, nor have I gotten reports of it.
<22:40:14> "Elsy": So this is new to me.
<22:40:55> "smirkybeard billbong": As Tsal, I used a lot of insults. You guys need to really consider the context of words and how they're used. Especially in RP.
<22:41:16> "Ellix": Just want to interject here, some words that are considered offensive slurs (dyke is one I've seen Tsal use) might need to be kept out.
<22:41:35> "smirkybeard billbong": Cunt and cocksucker being insults, for instance.
<22:41:36> "Raccoonism": I also missed it.
Things usually grab my attention if they are in GC or open reference to something sexual (As in not an insult)
<22:41:40> "smirkybeard billbong": Well, Tsal used both dyke and bugger.
<22:42:06> "Alijham": I agree. Personally, I feel like insults that contain things that could be considered sexual in another context, should be more loosely prosecuted.
<22:42:31> "Elsy": Are they allowed to use them in chat though, is the question?
<22:42:44> "Elsy": There's a difference between less punishment and no punishment.
<22:42:59> "Alijham": But if it is in a sexual context, it should be in private chat. Like, if it's an insult like dick or cunt, I think that should be allowed occasionally. Sometimes characters get fiesty, and that's okay. But I think things like dyke should not be allowed, as that is a slur toward a group of people.
<22:43:10> "Alijham": That's just me.
<22:43:32> "Kashya Vulano": I think as long as it's kept as an insult, it's fine. If it turns towards OOC chat with things like that, it should be maintained. Otherwise, I agree with Ali; perhaps restrict the use of the more discriminating words, such as "Dyke."
<22:43:43> "Raccoonism": All things in sexual context have to be private.
<22:43:44> "Ellix": I agree. It's the same with 'faggot' or 'nigger' (I need to wash my hands after typing all this).
<22:43:51> "Alijham": Yep yep
<22:44:06> "Alijham": I agree with Ellix and Kash
<22:44:17> "Raccoonism": THat's why I would like to focus the convo on insults
<22:44:17> "Ellix": If it's a specific slur, I think it should be kept out.
<22:44:18> "Elsy": So, sexual terms are allowed if it is an insult? Or only some sexual terms?
<22:44:23> "Elsy": Yes, slurs definitely out.
<22:44:28> "smirkybeard billbong": Well, nigger doesn't exactly fit the scenario.
<22:44:33> "Alijham": I think if it is genitalia, it is fine. But if it is a slut, it is not.
<22:44:39> "Alijham": slur*
<22:44:41> "Alijham": >_>
<22:44:42> "Kashya Vulano": xD
<22:44:42> "Elsy": gg
<22:44:48> "Kashya Vulano": Gold sticker o3o
<22:44:52> "Alijham": sahhhhhh
<22:44:53> "Bhidul": perfect lol
<22:44:53> "Alijham": shhhh
<22:44:54> "Raccoonism": We shouldn't be vague on this though.
<22:44:57> "Elsy": ^^^
<22:45:01> "Kashya Vulano": Aye, agreed.
<22:45:05> "Elsy": We need to draw the line so this doesn't happen in the future.
<22:45:09> "Elsy": What can be used and what can't.
<22:45:13> "Ellix": I was saying that to some people, 'dyke' is as offensive as 'nigger'
<22:45:17> "Alijham": Yep
<22:45:25> "Elsy": Yes so we've established slurs are a total no.
<22:45:45> "Alijham": I think as long as it is not in a sexual context, like for ex. obvs an insult, it should be allowed.
<22:45:53> "Kashya Vulano": ^
<22:45:54> "Alijham": Only ic, obv.
<22:45:54> "Ellix": Right, Tsal just seemed unclear on my point.
<22:46:02> "Ellix": I agree with Ali
<22:46:41> "Elsy": Ok, so currently it seems to me that everyone is saying sexual terms in IC insults is fine. Anyone who disagree that has yet to speak up?
<22:46:46> "smirkybeard billbong": Dunno. Some slurs should be allowed in RP, in my opinion. Not all, ofcourse. Since some obviously don't fit the world.
<22:47:03> "smirkybeard billbong": Stuff like race specific slurs.
<22:47:24> "WildCat800": I need to go, I got class in the morning
<22:47:26> "smirkybeard billbong": I mean it is all RP in the end. To me, atleast.
<22:47:26> "Alijham": If it's specific to the races ingame, I think that's okay. But if it could apply to someone ooc and offend them, I think not.
<22:47:34> "Elsy": That's fine Tylee, thanks for coming.
<22:47:38> "Ellix": You never know who you're RPing with
<22:47:40> "Alijham": ^
<22:47:40> "Elsy": ^^^
<22:47:41> "smirkybeard billbong": Yeah, you knife-eared scum.
<22:47:45> "Kashya Vulano": ^
<22:47:47> "Alijham": Like that's totally fine
<22:47:47> "Elsy": ^Stuff like that's fine.
<22:47:48> "Alijham": aha
<22:48:02> "Elsy": So specifically, slurs of OOC groups of people.
<22:48:05> "Ellix": Haha well yeah, if it's toward imaginary races
<22:48:10> "Alijham": Like, insulting a redguard with, "sand-toed raisin" or something would totally be okay
<22:48:11> "Elsy": OOC/IRL
<22:48:22> "Kashya Vulano": Sand-toed raisin
<22:48:25> "Elsy": ^
<22:48:25> "Raccoonism": This is TES.
Be creative with your insults and slurs. No need to use things from RL when you can craft something better.
<22:48:26> "Kashya Vulano": Oh my god I can't
<22:48:27> "Elsy": 10/10
<22:48:32> "Alijham": im proud of that one ill admit
<22:48:40> "Alijham": i agree raccoon! like sand-toed raisin
<22:48:42> "Kashya Vulano": I need to I"ll be right back I cant
<22:48:43> "Elsy": /facechainsaw
<22:48:45> "Alijham":
<22:49:43> "smirkybeard billbong": Reason why I said racial slurs wouldn't fit is because TES races are different to IRL. As for others? I don't see anything wrong about them, personally.
<22:49:50> "Alijham": I'd say we need to be a little less vague, but I'm not sure how to be more specific, and I think everyone understand where we're getting at.
<22:50:36> "Elsy": SO specificaly refering to IC:
-slurs of IRL/OOC groups of people (races, sexual orientations, religions, nationalities, etc) are unacceptable.
<22:50:43> "Alijham": Agreed
<22:51:00> "Ellix": Tsal, are you saying that you think slurs like 'dyke' are okay? Or just the imaginary in-game ones?
<22:51:24> "Raccoonism": Exactly Smirk.
They don't apply in game, thus they have no place or purpose there.
Gay/bi/ etc slurs are dangerous slope.
<22:51:33> "Alijham": ^
<22:51:36> "Elsy": ^^^
<22:51:55> "smirkybeard billbong": Why is it a dangerous slope? I might be bit tough in the head, but I personally don't understand.
<22:52:03> "Raccoonism": And honestly, you would only be setting more fires off for everyone else to snuff out.
<22:52:20> "Ellix": It creates a very hostile environment for any LGBT people in the guild.
<22:52:33> "Elsy": ^Yep, and we've got a number of LGBT people.
<22:52:36> "Alijham": For example, Silky, I'm not straight. So saying something such a 'dyke' might make my eye twitch, because I get called that IRL.
<22:52:37> "smirkybeard billbong": My character is generally hostile.
<22:52:38> "Raccoonism": It creats a hostile environment period.
<22:52:55> "Ellix": It creates an OOCly hostile environment.
<22:52:58> "Alijham": I don't mind it that much personally, because there is a very thick wall between ic and ooc to me, but not everyone feel that way.
<22:53:06> "smirkybeard billbong": I am not calling anyone a dyke OOC, thou.
<22:53:09> "Alijham": I know
<22:53:16> "Elsy": But it's like calling someone a "nigger" IC.
<22:53:17> "Alijham": But some people are a little bit more sensitive to it
<22:53:20> "Ellix": Doesn't matter. Some people don't like to see those words.
<22:53:22> "Elsy": It can be just as offensive to some people.
<22:53:44> "smirkybeard billbong": But calling somebody a nigger IC wouldn't fit the setting.
<22:53:49> "Raccoonism": Of course, but some may bleed and take offense.
That's why it's a slope.
Some guilds allow it, other's don't.
<22:53:51> "Ellix": Especially if it's something they deal with getting called IRL, they shouldn't have to deal with it in their game.
<22:53:59> "Elsy": I know it was an example.
<22:54:09> "Elsy": Yes to Ellix, and yes to Raccoon
<22:54:12> "Elsy": We're not one to allow it
<22:54:45> "Raccoonism": On a personal leave, I don't care if it is strictly IC, however the hordes of others it DOES upset are something we would have to deal with.
<22:54:57> "Alijham": I agree
<22:54:58> "Raccoonism": level*
<22:54:59> "Raccoonism": wow
<22:55:10> "Elsy": ^Exactly. And leaving those slurs out from the start makes for less offended people.
<22:55:45> "smirkybeard billbong": Guess that makes me a minority in this case.
<22:55:59> "Ellix": So no sexual orientation slurs, or any that apply to IRL groups of people.
<22:56:10> "Raccoonism": Hard to say, we have no way of knowing how many are and aren't offended.
<22:56:16> "Alijham": yep
<22:56:22> "Ellix": Right Tsal, but if it's a guild rule, it needs to be followed.
<22:56:25> "Raccoonism": we are just doing this to keep things at a level we can actually manage
<22:56:39> "Alijham": Even though you may not feel that way, you've got to be mindful and considerate in case others do
<22:56:44> "Elsy": Yep yep. We have to design for the whole.
<22:56:50> "Ellix": ^
<22:57:50> "smirkybeard billbong": I mean, some of the stuff is generally offensive to me too. But I don't let that get to me.
<22:58:00> "Alijham": Again, that doesn't mean it won't get to other people.
<22:58:01> "Elsy": Not all people are you.
<22:58:04> "smirkybeard billbong": Cus why would I? But I guess that all depends on the approach of folk.
<22:58:07> "smirkybeard billbong": Well, ofcourse.
<22:58:12> "Elsy": Though if you're offended, do feel free to tell us.
<22:58:38> "Elsy": Anyhow, slurs of IRL/OOC groups of people (races, sexual orientations, religions, nationalities, etc) are unacceptable. We seemed to be in the majority of, sexual terms/genitalia can be used when it's an insult. Yes?
<22:58:43> "Ellix": Can you agree to follow that rule, Tsal? Otherwise we're going to end up in a big circle.
<22:59:02> "Alijham": As long as it's understood that slurs are not allowed because they have potetial to offend, no matter if it's ic or ooc, we're on the same page.
<22:59:36> "Raccoonism": I will also note, that none of us are paid for doing this.
As such, we do this because we want to. It's hard to want to stop a flame war ever time one logs in.
Hence why measures are set. If this was an 18+ only guild, it would be a totally different ball field.
<22:59:53> "smirkybeard billbong": Don't think you would want me start telling you what offends me, being an orthodox christian. Hence why I called myself a minority in this case.
<22:59:56> "smirkybeard billbong": But yeah, I agree.
<23:00:27> "Elsy": Agreed Rac.
<23:01:17> "Alijham": Coolio. That, and as long as you understand the rules set from earlier about tone and all that jazz, I think we're about done here.
<23:01:27> "Raccoonism": Yep
<23:01:27> "Elsy": Wait Ali
<23:01:29> "Elsy": GUYS
<23:01:31> "Alijham": ye
<23:01:35> "Elsy": WE MISSED THE WHOLE SEXUAL THING
<23:01:38> "Alijham": wha
<23:01:40> "Elsy": No one ever said yes or no to me ;-;
<23:01:44> "Alijham": what did you ask?
<23:01:46> "Alijham": i didnt see it
<23:01:57> "Elsy": "We seemed to be in the majority of, sexual terms/genitalia can be used when it's an insult. Yes?"
<23:02:02> "Alijham": yeah
<23:02:02> "Elsy": T'was Tsal's main concern
<23:02:12> "Alijham": absolutely
<23:02:20> "Raccoonism": In strictly the context of insult, yes.
<23:05:04> "Elsy": Are we set on those things, and Tsal is everything you came here for resolved?
<23:07:05> "Ellix": *chirp chirp*
<23:07:08> "Ellix": I'm good
<23:07:20> "Raccoonism": So to clarify:
<23:08:09> "Raccoonism": -One strike removed on promise of improving communication. (on our ends as well)
-Sexual insults are allowed IC if they are specifically in context, insults.
<23:08:48> "Elsy": And -slurs of any IRL/OOC group of people are not allowed
<23:08:52> "smirkybeard billbong": "(on our ends as well)" so wait if you fail that will i get the strike back
<23:08:57> "Elsy": lol no
<23:09:01> "Raccoonism": Hehe no
<23:09:14> "Elsy": It means that we need to improve as well
<23:09:21> "Elsy": Since the situation wasn't entirely fair toyou
<23:09:22> "Raccoonism": but if we fail on our ends we will just end up back here, which none of us want.
<23:09:25> "Elsy": *to you
<23:09:50> "Elsy": Yep yep, communication is both ways, and so we need to improve as well
<23:10:15> "smirkybeard billbong": Yeah. Everything is settled, then.
<23:10:55> "Alijham": coolio
<23:10:58> "Raccoonism": Good, good
<23:11:05> "Elsy": Cool, thank you for talking to us, your cooperation, feedback, and understanding is always very appreciated.
<23:11:17> "Kashya Vulano": On that note: The roster is pretty much clean of inactive trial members; there are now around 80 less guildies. When's the last time spring cleaning was done? o3o
<23:11:26> "Elsy": Honestly?
<23:11:28> "Elsy": Over a year ago.
<23:11:34> "Elsy": >.>
<23:11:38> "Kashya Vulano": I'm going to make sure this roster stays clean. :l
<23:11:40> "Kashya Vulano": That doesn't include the some 100 inactives xD
<23:11:44> "Elsy": 3 Roster Masters ago
<23:11:45> "Elsy": xD
<23:12:17> "smirkybeard billbong": i am released from this prison now
<23:12:19> "Elsy": WOW DREAM WAY TO BE LATE
<23:12:23> "Elsy": jk
<23:12:23> "Alijham": goodbye
<23:12:32> "Elsy": Lol yes we're all good, thanks Tsal
<23:12:42> "smirkybeard billbong": aight cheers
ElsyApr 02, 2016