Amata

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    292

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Amata

  1. 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
  2. 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)
  3. 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)
  4. Would like these for my hayloft!!!
  5. 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!
  6. 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 💜✌🏼️
  7. 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.
  8. 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"?
  9. 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.
  10. PLEASE YES I dunno if we should.... but it would absolutely be fabulous to have that option!!
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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
  14. ...
  15. 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. 💜
  16. 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.
  17. I find everything about this post utterly delightful. I am not in a position to volunteer myself for this autumn fun right at this moment (sorry!) But I wanted to drop in and say "Wurm needs this, much more of this!" and also to say that I'd love to keep a bookmark on this & maybe when my IRL context settles down a bit, I might come around to join the autumn activities! ~ A 💜
  18. omg, yes. "end game" content for high level gather/harvesting skills to match high level content for combat and for crafting!! Yes, please. Gardening - can crossbreed / cultivate new flowers Foraging - can unlock bandages? / poultices? / healing covers? made from a wider variety of ingredients (basically, any of 'em?) Or can unlock new salves / ointments / unguents? Botany - can now plant, grow, and harvest just about any plant or crop in pots and planters inside buildings. Forestry - can use sprouts to graft a "shriveled" tree & return it back to a young age. Can graft trees to get "weeping" varieties, variant color varieties. I would just love to be able to do some of this stuff. (Don't tell me these practices are too modern - we've been grafting plants and experimenting with crossbreeding cultivars since the Fertile Crescent)
  19. That monstrosity is a mash-up of spade and shovel characteristics, but not enough of either to be effective in any capacity. Too shallow (flat) to truly shovel; too dull at the edge (thick) to truly dig. A testament to settling for mediocrity. This is a Jack-of-All tool intended for people who would rather have a job done, than a job done well. An all-purpose multi-tool can have usefulness on a case-by-case basis.... but these days, I mostly see these multi-tools as instruments keeping most people from realizing that specialized tools for specific uses typically means a job is easier to work and faster to finish. You know, "use the right tool for the job." Annnnnyway... I am glad to see this topic bumped back up to the top again. I adore Wurm as-is, but I would be lying if I did not admit that a certain portion of my brain yearns for a tad more inherent consistency & cohesion within various categories of game mechanics.
  20. Heya Y'all .... I know there have been some new replies, and I'm really looking forward to giving them a good read, a long think, and (hopefully) an intelligible response. As some of y'all might already know, I received some serious and also seriously bad news during a doctor appointment Wednesday morning, and I've mostly been hiding out on-deed grooming foals and lambs and baby seals since then. Just wanted y'all to know - I'm not ignoring your discussion points, and I will engage with your perspectives, just as soon as I can get the ground back under my feet again. Until then, stay healthy, safe, and happy plz. 💜
  21. I'm beginning to suspect that Jore searches for my forum posts solely to advise me to calm down & relax. But.... I just have a lotta feelings. PS. Have you met me?? I'm Amata; this is what I do. I drink tea, and I write too much.
  22. heya Platyna, sometimes your writing style, tone, or manner makes it hard for me to tell if you are approaching something like this to say it is a matter of courtesy, or a matter of rule of law. Given the topic of this thread is about discussing player courtesies, I am interpreting the above quoted reply as a suggestion that leaving perimeter lands alone should be the default common courtesy, as even when items or objects, etc, are left out on a perimeter, the game provides us with obvious mechanics (inspect the tile) to make a reasonable guess at who is the proper owner of the items, et al. Does that sound correct?

  23.  I am Amata - the bleedin' heart, tree-hugging, flower-crown-wearing, hand holding, bonfire dancing, let's-all-sing-together, socially progressive, shoulda-been-Canadian instead-of-American, Fo worshipping, hippie earth mama of Independence. 

     

    ✌🏼️🌱💜

  24. Hope Springs Eternal!!!!! ✌🏼️🌱💜

  25. Regarding "Stealing" on PVE islands....
    subtitled: Amata's Obvious Thoughts are Obvious

     

    Theft - the conscious taking of another's property, or public property, for personal use with no intention of remuneration or return - is entirely possible on PVE islands. Furthermore, there is currently NO RULE that adequately prohibits these actions. 

     

    If you look in the actual game rule set, you will not find any sentence saying, "stealing is not allowed on PVE servers." In the Wurm Online Rules, there are only 2 places where some sort of thievery is addressed. They are - 

    Lockpicking
    A ) Lockpicking anything that does not belong to you is not permitted.
    Punishment: You may be warned, or banned based on the situation.

     

    And

     

    Play Nice Or We Will Rip Your Heart Out (griefing)
    Definition: Activities that are not constructive or with deliberate intent to do harm to others.
    C ) You may not steal deeds from the original mayor or residing citizens.
     - resident citizens on democratic deeds may vote a new mayor for any reason.

     

    That, and only that, is it. 

    When you hear the sentence "stealing is not allowed on PVE servers" said by devs, GMs, mods, CA workers, and any other players .... what you need to hear is the following: "The Steal Action is disabled on PVE servers"

     

     

    Chapter Two: The "Steal" Action is disabled on PVE servers

     

    So here is my obvious thought - and I have to acknowledge Platyna for this since she has been calling this out & fighting for this cause since well before I got on board -

    It is entirely possible to act as a thief on PVE servers regardless of whether or not you use a "steal" action to do it. There are any number of ways that all of us already know to knowingly take an item, animal, or object, etc. that IS NOT YOURS, with no intention of remuneration or return, and completely get away with it. 

     

    On deed, off deed, out in the wild - there are a variety of contexts wherein a player can come across some other player's stuff sitting loose, and just pick it up and walk away. 

     

    A new player hasn't gotten their perms set correctly (yet). Someone is doing a day's worth of logging, harvesting, foraging, whatever - and there are piles and stacks kinda everywhere; they're on the other side of the field focused on working.... you can help yourself to the fruits of their labor. All the bins I see here are locked - except one! A player secured all of these things to the ground, except this one! As long as the owner is offline, I can just stand here bashing on this until it falls apart, or becomes unsecured, etc. 

     

    The creativity of thieves has no bounds - and when you've shut down one approach, they'll think up three more. 

     

    I know this. You know this. They know it, too. 

     

    Just because an action is possible as a matter of game mechanics does NOT inherently make it a permissible thing to do. Using "there's no stealing on PvE servers" as a shield against complaint or redress is disingenuous at best. And when moderators fall back on that line in order to fast-track the resolution of a support ticket, they are selling out the "fair and just" members of the community to the "take advantage anyway possible" toxic elements - and for what? - convenience? The ability to discharge their responsibilities and get back to playing their own games? Because they are only volunteers and are literally not getting paid enough for this? 

     

    That's no fair to us - and it's not fair to the moderators either. 

     

     

    Chapter Three: What about Ruin Hunters and Legit Scavenging? 

     

    Yeah, what about it? 

    Here's the thing, players with reasonable concerns - your concerns are reasonable and I'm talking about activities that are known to be unreasonable by the entire community. So I'm not really talking about you, now am I? 

     

    To be blunt for clarity's sake...  Ruin Hunting and/or Scavenging are legitimate, time-honored activities in Wurm. Everyone I know, including myself, has done some scavenging or ruin hunting in their gameplay, at least once. This is TOTALLY DISTINCT from stealing from other players in a number of ways. Off the top of my head, here are some notable differences: 

    1. Ruin Hunters, and to a lesser degree Scavengers, are specifically looking for ruins.
      They are looking for those deeds they see announced server-wide as disbanded. They are checking the ground tiles to see if a thing is on-deed, or if the land is actually un-deeded wilds. They're checking walls and fences for unrepaired decay - not 10, 20, or 30 damage - but significant decay. The kind of decay that is a sign of an abandoned deed. A homestead nobody is calling 'home' anymore. Signs that a player has quit, or has been on an extended leave of absence. They are looking for planted signs saying, "I'm away this month due to surgery. Be back soon!" or such. 
       
    2. Thieves are looking for opportunity. 
      Unlike Ruin Hunters and Scavengers.... a thief doesn't care, and probably is not checking to see, if a deed is abandoned. If a homestead has become a ruin. If this collection of random items, objects, or bins were all clearly made by the same player, or planted by the same player. They're not going to try and contact that player to see if it's okay to "liberate" items, or move objects, or to make off with whatever resources are available. The point IS the taking. 
       
    3. If "caught," confronted, or contacted - any Ruin Hunter or Scavenger with any self-respect will say, "oh, sorry! my mistake" and return or repay any things taken, within reason. A thief will resist, or ignore, or deny.
       
    4. If the response is "deed it or lose it," that person knew that it was somebody else's stuff and decided to take it anyway because it was possible, not because it was an okay thing to do. As you read through this thread, there is a very noticeable theme. There are people who say, "deed it or lose it" and then follow up with an acknowledgement that, naturally, being a nice neighbor and a well-intentioned player should be the higher priority. And there are also people who say, "deed it or lose it" and then mic drop and walk away from the discussion like they've just totally owned what is honestly a complex and nuanced discussion. Guess which players are Ruin Hunters and which players are Thieves. Go ahead, I'll wait. 

     

    If you are a THIEF - you are either a total newbie and unintentional thief.... or you are actually a thief and even when playing dumb, you know it. 

     

    If you are a RUIN HUNTER,  or another player, who knows they are not a thief and are interjecting defensively.... I see you, we all know you, and we know you're legit,  so this isn't about you. I love you, but your additional comments are muddying the waters  and unintentionally aligning yourself - our legit neighbors - on the same side as thieves. I don't want that. You don't want that. So please, with all due respect, this isn't about you. 

     

     

    Chapter Four: Permission Systems and that Purse Analogy

     

    Is it possible for all of us to agree that a person can simultaneously acknowledge preventative steps while also suggesting that the goal is to make such steps unnecessary?

     

    That's about where I am on the subject of stealing on PVE islands. 

     

    The "steal" action, as a game mechanic, is unavailable. It is disallowed. So people argue that any undesired "taking" activities cannot possibly be "stealing" since the "steal" action literally cannot be used. While at the same time, there are systems of property protection, and so any discourse on theft or ownership in Wurm inevitably boils down to whether or not the owner sufficiently made use of the available protections. And that, whether you want to hear this or not, is the textbook definition of victim blaming. 

     

    Yes, by all means, players should do what they can to prioritize certain items or objects or resources - and put those things specifically under lock and key, and then another lock and key, and then another one inside that. Put what you love inside a locked box, inside a locked chest, inside a locked vehicle, parked inside a locked building, situated on a deed with every possible permission turned off and 31+ days of upkeep in the coffer. 

     

    But if you drop your purse in your perimeter - for any reason at all - that STILL does not give anyone the RIGHT to take your purse. 

     

    Here's how it works... humans don't refrain from taking what belongs to others because there are TEH RULEZ telling us not to. We do not take what belongs to others because THAT IS NOT THE CORRECT WAY TO BEHAVE. PERIOD. Even if there is a Rule saying that it's not against the rules to do so, and that you'll get away totally free with no consequences - guess what? - it's STILL NOT RIGHT. Inherently. 

     

    I honestly do not know why many (most?) humans intuitively grasp this concept, while others need to be taught to understand social ethics, while still others can have any amount of guidance and teaching and philosophy and arguments and yet they just absolutely do not get it. Worse is when you encounter a person who does get it, but just does not care. But this is a situation that exists, IRL and in Wurm; that's just how humans are, and the question becomes "what do we do about it? What next?"

    And, for those who have been taking stabs at this back and forth, here is the Purse analogy you were looking for: 
    Given that a perimeter is a "public space" AND

    Given that individual / player rights in public spaces are changed from their rights in private spaces (e.g. on deed) AND 
    Given that technical stealing is disallowed as a game mechanic, but theft is possible, especially in public spaces AND

    Given that we are not talking about the perimeter of an abandoned deed or other Ruin Hunter / Scavenger situation.... 
     

    Quote

     

    It is like I went to a public park and I set out a nice little picnic area, right out there on the grass. There's a blanket and my shoes and maybe a basket with foods, and also some toys or a coloring book, or a Nintendo Switch. And there's my purse, laying with all that stuff, on my picnic blanket, on the grass, unlocked, in public space. 

     

    And I stood up in the grassy space adjacent to that and started playing Frisbee with my friends. I'm not on the picnic blanket. I'm not physically there, keeping proximity ownership over those things. I'm just nearby, having fun. I might even get a little distracted by our game of Frisbee, and I'm not exactly keeping watch over my stuff. This is a big public space; the park is pretty huge. There's a fairly decent gap between where I am playing Frisbee near my picnic spot and any other people with their own spots. Even if I'm not exactly next to my stuff, it is obvious to any reasonable adult that I am the most likely owner of that stuff. 

     

    There are no locks. There is no sign posted not to take stuff that is on the ground in the park. My purse is available, especially since I'm not physically next to it at this exact moment, and I am distracted while doing a different activity in some other direction. This is public space. 

     

     

    Do I still have any say-so over the purse? The Nintendo Switch? The food and blanket? Are they mine? Or could they be anybody's? 

    Should someone feel free to walk up, sit down, and eat the food? Play a bit on the Switch? 

    Should a stranger help themselves to the contents of the purse since it isn't locked? Should that person feel free to simply take the entire purse home with them? 

    It was out in public, after all. 

    Does it matter that I am obviously adjacent to that picnic setup?
    Does anyone owe it to ask me first if I've got an interest in the spot, and maybe some of that stuff is "mine" in some way? 

     

    If there is no Rule forcing us - do we actually owe anything to ourselves and to others? 

     

     

    Chapter Five: What is my Point? 

    No seriously, I'm asking, what the heck is my friggin point? 

     

    There is a "social contract" meme that goes around American social media every so often. Reading through this topic has brought it to my mind, and I hear it in my head any time I start reading a reply on this thread. I dunno if other countries have their own versions of this meme that pop up any time there's a big social scandal, or an unpopular local policy in effect, or a major political event like an election. In the meme, the details or specifics highlighted can vary depending on what's current... But,  the bottom line is generally the same: I don't know how to explain that you should care about others. If this is not self-evident to you, perhaps you can kindly get lost so that the rest of us can have a productive society here without you. 

     

    I really don't want to get in trouble or anything, so I'm putting the current American version of the meme under a spoiler. Also, take the specifics with a grain of salt - they are relevant specifically to an ongoing modern American discussion about government stuff, and this meme can easily be found with other bullet points or other examples more relevant to different countries and different discussions. Is that okay with everyone?
     

    Spoiler

    mVEL5kL.jpg

     

     

    In short: Platyna is correct. 
    Either "stealing" is not allowed on PVE as a Rule - and therefore should actually be in the Rules, and should encompass all thievery no matter how a player 'gets away with it' .....

     

    OR - stealing IS allowed on PVE and we should stop using vague sentences like "stealing isn't allowed on PVE" when we are only talking about one very specific game mechanic that has been literally turned off ... otherwise, we are giving players an incorrect picture of the game play environment, and leaving them open to misunderstandings at best. (Plus, it is completely disingenuous and in poor faith for building a nontoxic community.)