Amata

Members
  • Content Count

    251
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Amata

  1. ... not a fan of kilts? curious about this response, too. is it a look thing? or a game mechanic thing (like, how to implement "apron") ?
  2. Sorry, didn't mean offense -- meant what I said in the context of someone else saying. "let's not name it after any deed" - and I wanted to point out that the Valyrian name was not just "some deed" but an obviously important one that has done much work for the development of the area. Deeds that don't really work with the land in a bigger, more public way, tend to be the transient ones... the deeds that organize (and name) community projects and public works are the ones that stick around & leave their mark - and should be honored for their contributions. Is all.
  3. Exactly. If some mechanism is needed for these less patient players, then being able to ignore the other player for several hours should solve any problem. But it should work in a way that it can be turned on/off by the individual player so as not to centralize the possibility of censorship on any player or any topic. Okay, I'll need to go look this up in greater detail.... but the other day, while looking through the list of commands available in game (for some unrelated reason) ... I came across a command that I had never seen or heard of before... /snipe And if any older players or mods or GMs or gods want to briefly chime in solely for the purpose of an official explanation of the "/snipe" command - I would appreciate the clarification. But, as far as I can tell... the /snipe command functioned basically as a "vote-to-mute" for a community channel. If someone was being particularly obnoxious or whatever, individual players could use the snipe command to add to a hidden "mute" tally - once that tally crossed a certain threshold (enough individual community members cast their own snipe commands) - the "sniped" player was muted. Like social sanctions. Self-moderating. I don't believe the command works anymore, and I don't know anything else about it. Maybe it was something that Wurm tried for a while and it was a disaster? Maybe it was an idea that could never get the program code to work properly? No idea. But I agree that I would much prefer decentralized, context-relative, "power to the people" solutions instead of rules, regulations, and enforcement. If anyone else has any ideas that are decentralized, context-relative, and community centered, I would be happy to listen & brainstorm those all day long!!
  4. I adore the way that this reply seems to ring with optimism and goodwill. I really do. I find it uplifting and refreshing! I find that, as I read this, I want it to be true to life. This is the future I want - not just in Wurm, but basically everywhere. That discussion WAS fantastic and I really loved it too. As much as the reminder of that conversation makes me very happy to think about, I also have one point of consideration that I would like to be considered.... Is this the type of moderation interaction you have seen & experienced in reality in game?
  5. I am honestly curious, as a matter of personal view, is this a summary of your philosophy regarding any / all sets of rules? As a quick disclaimer - I am musing here beyond the scope of the actual topic being discussed in this thread. In America, our nation's founders suggested that one reason to develop a set of rules (laws) was "to promote the general welfare." This, and a few other key phrases that make a nice little schoolhouse song, are written into the US Constitution as the underlying rationale for having any mutually agreed upon laws, at all. In the current climate, I have actually found myself musing on this, and the other key phrases, and questioning which are personal priorities; which are ideals that might be outdated; which have been emphasised historically; and so on. Other than broadly thinking about what it means to "promote the general welfare" - I unfortunately have not arrived at any profound revelations or that "perfect system that will solve every problem." Like you, I am ambivalent about whether such a system even exists - and believe that if one does, it is either to be found in the ordered patterns of Nature, or somewhere completely abstracted - like higher mathematics or theoretical physics, or some such place. In any event - I would like to know more about your thoughts, not only these general thoughts on sets of rules - but also as it pertains to the actual topic I presented for consideration.
  6. Out of curiosity, Trickster, ... how would you give answer to the question of "censorship" ?
  7. This honestly means a lot to me. I've seen a bit on the forums and in chat recently about "unwritten rules" and "common courtesy" and the like. I've also had any number of PMs lately with a wide variety of Wurm players who took the opportunity to reveal to me, their mental health status. Any number of Wurm players may be exactly the sort of person who, through no fault of their own, struggle to understand and relate to "unwritten rules" and "social conventions" and "common courtesies." As others have noted in various responses on this topic so far, a player cannot expect that other Wurm players share the same concepts of courtesy or toxicity in interpersonal interactions. All we have to help put us all on the same page are the Rules As Written. Players might voluntarily extend to each other niceties that are unwritten or not otherwise specified. That's nice. It is optional, however, and while it might earn a bit of extra esteem among your neighbors, those Wurm players who do not spend time with "niceties" are not uncourteous, they are not to be considered rude - they are simply our Wurm neighbors with direct and businesslike manner. But navigating social interplay in a larger community is trivial compared to when the misunderstandings really begin. I truly believe that it is, to some extent, necessary for moderators to have reasonable amounts of discretionary power - at very least, so a moderator is empowered to read a room; to respond based on context as well as black & white "facts"... But when mods step in to break up a discussion, or act to mute a player, based on something that is not in the Rules As Written - they (and we) are immediately in the no man's land of a judgement call. Did the mod read the room correctly? Was there actually a problem going on? The best analogy I can think of right now is that when young children are playing in the backyard, it is extremely hard to know what is playful roughhousing - and what is bullying that needs intervention. I think "reasonable amounts" of discretionary power can be (should be?) limited when possible. One way to do this is to add areas of known instability into the rule set from the start.
  8. What do you see as the extent of "we may as well ban everything that could offend anyone in any way." If you are not implying a slippery slope, can you please clarify what you mean by this? Also I'm not sure you answered the previous question I had about this specific point: I would like to better understand the rationale behind this discussion point - Can you elaborate how it is reasonable to expect that adding "politics" to the enumerated list will ultimately arrive at a need to ban every topic with the possibility of offense? Your most recent response had a whole lot to unpack there. I'm still picking through aspects of it, but overall, I got the impression that the core elements were a nearly identical repetition of your previous response. Maybe you missed it - but I did go through your earlier reply & had a few specific questions or clarifications I would love to hear you address. your syntax. Your phrasing was unclear and I would like you to please clarify your pronouns, among other things. This is a solid point. Trolls gonna troll. ... on the other hand, if I know that a troll is comin' to attack me, I would rather that the troll have a fishing pole equipped than a huge shod club. Why allow a troll easy access to things that can actually cause serious wounds? Haters gonna hate; trolls gonna troll - but I don't go around handing out ammo, because some people do not grasp the concept of contextual relativity. ... clearly. Although I feel as though I've spent the last 3 pages working with others to help define and identify which areas of concern are problematic, and for what reason.... I also feel that as many times as you repeat this question, I ought to have a ready answer. So today, here is what I was considering: Why add "politics" to the enumerated list? Because of the balance of probability standard. I am curious what you meant to suggest by this ?
  9. But are they, tho? If you lower expectations, a community will always disappoint. If you raise the bar, you have the chance of the community rising above expectations. ... maybe? One bais that I must acknowledge is that I was raised in high-expectation type communities, and shoved in among peers and colleagues that constantly vied to exceed expectations by the greatest amount possible. That's simply what I am used to - and it is good to remember that other people have other experiences of what a community of people might be capable of or not. This honestly sounds entirely reasonable to me. IMO - topics should not be banned unless specifically necessary due to laws for "family friendly" game ratings. And that specific underlying reason should be clearly written in black and white in the game rules. Any other topic under the sun should be left free for the community to explore if they want to. You are correct that everything above and beyond this adds layers of nuance - and many scenarios end up relyant on player's experiences and personal lives and beliefs and opinions. At this point in time, I don't think I care anymore about how mods handle trolling - at this point, I just care that mods are actually able to identify trolling. If I were to go back in time and write this post again, I would take greater care in the initial post to differentiate between Wurmians having conversations of all sorts with different opinions... and trolling / harassment in chat. Looking back, I feel like my original post was a bit of a tangle of threads, but feedback and discussion here has helped straighten out & separate the bits of string from each other. One loose thread is a somewhat straight-forward question: the game Rules have an enumerated list of traditionally touchy topics to avoid, why is political topics not part of this list? Another bit of string might be: Beyond what might be legally necessary to retain a "family friendly" game rating, is it even appropriate for Wurm to be listing topics banned from discussion? The last bit that I feel has been unwound goes something like: having a list of disallowed topic content has an unintended effect of muddying the waters for moderators trying to distinguish between players having engaging discussions and players trolling and/or harassing each other. Even if no topics of conversation were banned, Wurm would still have a game Rule against trolling and a Rule against harassment. Those rules need to be clarified, and then enforced with some level of consistency, please. I have been thinking about this bit a lot. There is much content in Wurm that is proudly advertised as "player-driven" and "player-generated".... I keep thinking that if "everyone does" (have a right inside Wurm) - that ought to mean that everyone is also able to have a hand in judgement and reparations. As you mention, a moderator is merely a judge who can state with authority whether something is or is not against a Rule. And following this, most (all?) Wurmians can name at least 1 moment where "technically, no rule was broken" but the community involved more or less all agree that something wrong was done, even if it wasn't against the Rules. If it truly is down to the individual person(s) to deal with it, and /ignore is the weapon we are given - we are basically saying that when we're in Wurm and there's a troll lurking around the neighborhood, don't attack it or anything, just ignore that it's there, and ... what, exactly? Say Mr Troll please stop hitting me with that rough shod club? No, in Wurm we mount our horse and kill the troll. With neighbors and guards if need be. But in chat and in the forums? I don't think we have an equivalent action at our disposal. And if we try to give as good as we get, we tend to get warned & muted too. Yeah. well, yes to this. Pretty much all of this. There's a lot of things that I've been reflecting on from the responses to this topic. And this specific section right here tells me that I miscommunicated in my first post. I was not very clear or precise, or I had too many aspects layered up to effectively discuss any one individually. But this is not the first (and I suspect not the last) response that rests on a premise that even with a political topic, the situation in question is a conversation being held in good faith. And that the interpersonal conflict arises from simply not liking the trend or tone or opinions being voiced. Whereas, I've been trying this whole time to talk about something entirely different. So that's on me, everyone. It was my job in the first post to clearly articulate the premise, the problem, and suggest one possible solution. And I clearly failed in that regard. The other thing that I have learned from the general tone and content of various responses, is that I had just assumed that all islands had chat channel content roughly equivalent to the chat channel content I've been seeing since joining Wurm. One trend I've picked up from responses is a general underestimation of the impact of the problematic interactions. All I can say in the forums at this time is that I wouldn't make a post about everyday conversations that simply hurt some feelings when different opinions were expressed. Taken together, this suggests to me that I probably overestimated the spread of this sort of behavior and pervasiveness in the broader Wurm community. I observed a situation where the few dominated and alienated the many - and when questioned, the many replied, "its better to just give up now; we've tried to address this issue but nothing has worked. nobody likes it, but we've got nothing else we can do. you'll get used to it eventually." Generally a community with this kind of response is due to a "there's just too many of 'em, Cap'n" situation; so I had thought it implied that what I was seeing was fairly standard for the Wurm community no matter what island you were on or what subforum you were visiting. So if I've been overestimating the spread of trolls and toxic dumps in Wurm, I apologise and I am, frankly, a bit relieved. You are intelligent and willing to interact, and challenge me... I am genuinely curious - If Mr Insane is on the main chat channel for your server every day, spouting off and trying to stir up contention and drama; what methods do you use to maintain interactions with the others on your island, while also avoiding ever using the main chat channel?
  10. Honestly, I kinda really agree. Especially since deeds can come and go. For me, the one exception might be with the "Valyrian Highlands" name - since that was less about the deed using the Valyrian name, but instead inspired by the Valyrian Steel Expressway, the tunnel road that goes through the center of that area; and, I believe, will likely last much longer than any one particular deed
  11. HI fellow people of Independence! Quick Question: Does this mountainous area (circled in red highlighter below) - NE of Dragon Fang - have a name of its own? If not, I have a couple possible suggestions below, and would be interested if one is liked enough to name the area on the community map? I dunno how mountains and steppes and geographical features go about getting named, and by whom. If there is no previously established name... I might suggest something like one of the following - Inner Colossal Belt Valyrian Highlands Grand Mountain Range / Grand Mountain Belt / Grand Mountains Northeast Highlands / North Central Highlands / Grand Steppe Highlands / etc [local deed name] Belt / [local deed name] Highlands / [local deed name] Range (local deed examples: Lorath, Heartsease, Green Shadow, Hermit's, Heaven, Golden Pearls, ...?) What do y'all think?? (Personally, of the above, I kinda like Valyrian Highlands, or one of the "Grand Mountains" options maybe)
  12. YES YES YES Everytime I see "Tim the Toolwoman" I cringe. (Note: If Pumpkin King is a gender neutral title bc it is a reference to a specific character... PLEASE remove the "Toolwoman" aspect of this title - as this is also a reference to a specific character, and therefore gender neutral)
  13. Would like these for my hayloft!!!
  14. would it maybe be possible to award every player all the tiles for relevant skill levels, so then players simply have a choice of what title they'd like to use? Not for nothing, but creating female-equivalents of gendered titles, only solves the underlying issue for players who identify as a binary gender. It does relatively little for Wurmians who might be agender, genderqueer, nonbinary, or simply sometimes want to be "Pumpkin King" bc we like a certain movie and sometimes want to be a "Norn" bc that's just awesome. Choices & Options! Yay!
  15. RainRain, I very much enjoyed your response and honestly liked many of the individual points you made. I fully intend to make a real response you so rightly deserve - but I've hit a time limit this evening (and I realllllly need to eat). I'll try to make a reply that shows how much I appreciated your thoughtful input, as soon as I can
  16. Hi Azgodeth! I am interested in the conclusion you have suggested (I marked in bold above). Although it feels a little bit like a causal slope, I would like to better understand the rationale behind this discussion point - Can you elaborate how it is reasonable to expect that adding "politics" to the enumerated list will ultimately arrive at a need to ban every topic with the possibility of offense? 1 person tending to fight with or act on dislike for another 1 person = reasonable scope for /ignore usage X people in 1 deed tending to poor interpersonal interactions with another X person and/or 1 deed = reasonable scope for using /ignore 1 alliance with a general pattern for poor interactions when dealing with 1 or 2 other alliances = reasonable scope for using / ignore X person and/or people known for a constant stream of problematic interactions with the majority of the entire server = well beyond a reasonable expectation that the entire server should individually use /ignore and cede the chat channel and/or subforum to continued misuse. AND on top of that - because moderation is discretionary - repeated reporting of X person / people for "trolling" or "harassment" results in the underlying issue being addressed sporadically, if at all. So I reached the point of coming to this Suggestion. I would be pleased to hear from you a better suggestion for handling situations where - in fact - the mute function does not work. I'm honestly confused who this is addressing. Is "a few people" the people using politics as a topic to troll; and the "opinions of others" the other people in chat who have asked for the upsetting behavior to stop? (A few people are misbehaving and don't like listening to others' opinions that the behavior is negative / toxic, and needs to stop) Or Is "a few people" the individuals in chat who don't like to listen to trolling or extremist remarks, and the "opinions of others" the characterization of those extremist remarks / trolling? Please clarify. If few = the trolls, and others = the other players in chat, then I believe this is an accurate summary of the type of situation I would like to see handled (better?) (more consistently?) by Wurm staff. If you dislike or find fault with the Suggestion(s) I am working with in this topic, I would very much appreciate your input on how to modify or completely change the suggestion to be more acceptable. However, if few = people who have been offended, and others = players simply sharing their opinions on political topics, then I agree with you. The mere sharing of political opinions in chat is insufficient reason for banning topics or escalating from a relatively simple /ignore function.
  17. Hi Beastwolf (1) It is not infantile to want to discuss when and how "rules" step in when voluntary courtesy fails to safeguard desired interpersonal interactions. (2) The premise of the problem rests on a situation where the chat is specifically not fair and non extremist. I agree that "fair and non extremist" chat and forum posts should be free and unregulated and promoted and enjoyed by all. What, if anything, do you think should be done to curb and/or react to chat and forum posts that are unfair and extremist. Also, what is the rubric you might suggest we all use to determine what is "fair" and what is "non extremist"?
  18. I'm gonna hit up the smaller responses in a quick manner before I dive into the wonderful things that RainRain has said. Hope that is okay with everyone. I have previously taken a look at the idea that this discussion / topic / suggestion approaches or overlaps with the realm of censorship. On censorship, I agree: censorship is not a good thing, and we should fight against it. On whether or not what, specifically, we are discussing here qualifies as censorship... I am ambivalent. I am open to being convinced that putting 'politics' on the enumerated list is, at its core, a matter of censorship - but so far, honestly, I have not yet heard a compelling discussion on that point. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that many -1 posts use "censorship' in a manner suggestive of a little straw man mixed with a variation of Godwin's Law. That is, I have found these responses to be more interested in declaring the entire discussion problematic due to CeNS0rShiP! (and daring anyone to disagree - thus arguing from an assumed pro-censorship position) rather than interested in engaging in an examination of what, if any, aspects of censorship are in play. With all the discussion so far, I think my position re: censorship has become this - IF we determine that maintaining an enumerated list of topics to avoid in chat, and in the forums, is ultimately a form of censorship that we reject; THEN the entire list should be removed from the game rules. For me, there is only 1 caveat - IF an enumerated list of banned topics is removed from the rules, THEN it is reasonable for Wurm to instead ban only such topics or content that is legally necessary to maintain a "family friendly" rating on an international level. I would expect the content rules to look something like this, if the enumerated list were removed, my additions and subtractions are marked in purple. I used bold text to emphasis that article "B" already provides a decent basis for addressing rules specifically because of laws involving young audiences / "family friendly" content.
  19. PLEASE YES I dunno if we should.... but it would absolutely be fabulous to have that option!!
  20. with regard to "reasoning" - I wouldn't want to put words in Retro's or Etherdrifter's mouths, so I'm just gonna put my guess / interpretation out there & see if it resonates with anyone.... I don't think that foraging and botany are "diluted" so much as "underdeveloped" ... I think the impetus underlying this entire topic is the "solid reasoning" mentioned above - that, as the game has developed, Foraging and Botany can get lost underneath other, more robust, skills. And therefore: Etherdrifter's suggestion on how to approach that fundamental issue. (by nature of the Suggestion forum de facto "rules" - suggestion posts are not supposed to only point at an issue and say, "high time someone takes a look at this" - but actually provide an idea about what one possible solution might be.) It is the need for a solution that is solid, even if Etherdrifter's specific solution is one that you, personally, find fault with. I agree with Etherdrifter (and Retro) in the assessment that, comparatively, foraging and botany are both lagging behind other, more robustly developed skills & subskills. I really think it's high time someone takes a look at this - not because F&B are useless or unnecessary - but because they both can and should be so much more. Questions Raised By This Topic (include but are not limited to) Could developing forage & botany as skill sets also trigger a broader re-organizing of all skills & subskills? Could a closer consideration of forage & botany skills necessarily result in a merging of the two skill sets? could an overhaul of skills & subskills create a parent skill (like "wildcrafting") and forage & botany become individual subskills in that category? what, if any, high-level usage can be added to forage and to botany to highlight the usefulness of these skills at all skill levels (not just at the newbie level)? could an over-all skill organizational review impact the current food affinity system - and if so, how great an impact could be the result? if skill merging is undesired, what other approach could prioritize the goal of expanding these two skills while retaining their individual / unique purposes? I have zero experience with game design, programming, or coding. I currently have pretty much no experience on which to even hazard a guess at some of these questions. I think that any of these question has a possibility of a "yes" - I have no way to determine if that is merely a non-zero possibility or actually a probability. The following comments are entirely my extremely unsubstantiated opinions... I would not want F&B merged. I would want F&B very clearly delineated from each other. I would not want a large overhaul of all skills to get involved unless absolutely necessary (or unless there is information that the devs have that makes that a desired option instead of an onerous undertaking). I would be pleased with the creation of a new parent skill and both forage and botany moved into that category as subskills. I would not want the food affinity system completely up-ended. But, also, I would not want positive game development delayed or avoided simply because of changes to the food affinity system. And, finally, I would like finding random loose coinage to be removed from foraging; bc I would like to see a future "treasure hunting" type skill that takes skill level into account in a risk/reward system starting at "finding a penny on the ground" and moving through "loose change in the couch" and "fought a troll for the treasure chest he was carrying" the whole way up to "followed a treasure map to buried riches beyond my wildest dreams"... but that's a topic for another time.
  21. This post has made me giddy like a schoolgirl. I adore the concept examples you have brainstormed - I think that's some solid proof-of-concept, tbh. I very much also like that while some of the affixes are combat-related, some of them are environmental. That is B R I L L I A N T. Because I am a hippy-dippy moon child, I wonder if there might be some beneficial affixes too? Young Champion Deer of Viridity - causes Wild Growth effect on tiles it crosses Old Champ Wild Cat of Cleansing - removes infected / poison status from wounds of those on same tile Venerable Champ Unicorn of Healing - acts as a potency (6) healing cover for those on same tile Adolescent Champ Gorilla of the Mist - improves protection from thorns and lava for same and adjacent tiles Venerable Champ Tortoise of the Rain - causes Humid Drizzle effect on same and adjacent tiles Venerable Champ Mountain Lion of Enlightenment - provides X% skillgain boost on same tile Adolescent Champ Sheep of Love - causes Refreshment effect on same tile Aged Champ Dog of Protection - improves protection from [random] damage for same & adjacent tiles (Acid, fire, frost) Old Champ Rooster of Insanity - this animal is under the effect of the "roleplaying quirks" from meditation's Path of Insanity; will generate random emotes Eatherdrifter has a good point, though.... it is not unheard of that a random angry, fierce, greenish, or champ mob travels through the neighborhood of newbie towns & spawn points. An old hardened lava fiend of focus walkin' through Local in an area mostly populated by new or low-level players would be a very harsh time, indeed. Would it be possible to have these rare spawns tethered to a "lair" style spawn location? Something in the environment (other than the nasty itself) that might give a player the heads up that there is a special nasty in the area, and they need to scram if they aren't up for the challenge. Like an enemy boss who likes to lurk in the great hall / throne room / dark cave / creepy ruin / frozen crypt... etc.
  22. I can see the point you're making here, but I'm not entirely convinced. I dunno if "consolidate/combine" is the solution ... but, honestly, I can agree that it might be time to take a look at the range of nature-related skills & sort them out a bit better. Farming and gardening, and forage and botany. Where does one end and the others begin? Are each of these individual categories robust & fleshed-out? Can some be given a little love? What are ways to provide gardening, forage, and botany (and forestry, even!) the same breadth of content and "end game" goals that farming has? Katrat may be correct that skilling up forage and botany is considered by many to be a solid return on time investment... but that doesn't mean it couldn't be even better. I have mentioned some of these ideas & brought up wildcrafting before.... Here are some ideas for fleshed-out "end game" content for these skills... and then also here is where I talk about wildcrafting for fun and profit health. Love everyone's ideas, as usual ~ A
  23. Oh hai Beanbag! LOL good joke just in case it needs to be stated: I don't keep a journal of my internet arguments. I simply keep a journal. And, by the way, I have internet discourse when I am engaged and pleased and think highly of the people in the community. I have internet arguments when I've lost control of my emotions, typically when I have felt pushed over a boundary that I clearly asked multiple times for others to back away from. To date, I have had one 'argument' here in the Wurm community. It was a result of ongoing chat from someone who recently acknowledge that he had, in fact, been trolling. To be fair, however, I don't honestly expect others unfamiliar with me IRL to be able to tell the difference -- there are times when my wife and I are enjoying a thoroughly engaging discussion, and even our parents and siblings start to wonder if we are actually having an argument. (we're not; we just geek out with the intensity of a supernova) It is usually only our IRL long-time friends who both can recognize and can engage comfortably with our "all-in" way of communicating. For Beanbag - and for the Wurm community in general - if the way that I'm delving into a topic or discussion is crossing your boundaries, or otherwise making you uncomfortable, please go ahead and just tell me that straight-forward. I will do what I can to pull back and/or adjust my manner to be less overwhelming / uncomfortable / off-the-deep-end, etc.
  24. I am always going to support requests for greater variety of gear - especially civilian clothing. Overalls, leather BS aprons, cloth bakery or tavern aprons, clothes & hats that make up outfits like "a baker" or "a milk maid" or "equestrian / stable master" etc. Generally... clothing? Yes, more please.