Let's Talk Common Courtesies....

[Oreo 5,793]

6 hours ago, Thorinoakshield said:

 

Thank your for your constructive and extremely narrowminded point of view.

 

Now since you're one of those very few players making $100K a month, would you be so kind to deed it all, before you lose it?


Thorin  

wow that's a really intelligent comment

 

im not the one complaining about losing stuff that i knowingly didnt deed over, and then come to the forums to cry because "its close to me, so its mine"

 

Oreo

[gnomegates 1,427]

.

Edited November 13, 2020 by gnomegates

[TheTrickster 2,283]

I think it is being either overlooked or forgotten that "Deed it or lose it" is a warning to owners, along the lines of "Don't leave your handbag on the front seat of your car with the window down" .  The warning about the handbag does not invite or excuse the theft of the handbag should that happen, and the the warning about deeding does not invite or excuse the theft of your stuff should that happen.   

 

To me, the "courtesy"  bit is not about theft (I think we can all agree that theft is a bit on the rude side) but about other behaviours that affect neighbours.  "Deed it or lose it" only really comes up because we are discussing what people should do, and one thing people should do about protecting their own stuff is have it on deed, if possible.  The cranky-pants who tells me off for knocking up a fenced camp too close to "his" place is as inconsiderate as I am.  Maybe more so.  

 

So, some more courtesy pointers (or "Grease for smooth interactions")

 

Deed what you want to protect as being yours.

Make off-deed (even perimeter) "holdings" obvious (There are many ways to achieve this).

[Platyna 521]

I have to agree with Ekcin and Trickter. They made excellent points, and these points are what we ALL (I hope so) are used to. If you leave a handbag on the back seat of your car and someone will take it, it will be still theft. This is a common definition of theft. And we, the people (sic!) have a right to have the written rules, we all accept as playing the game means accepting them, to have them upheld and applied. Deed it or lose it a good rule for Chaos not for Independence. It is okay as a warning as GMs can't run after every stolen handbag, but this never should be a rule. 

 

We play online games to get some rest from the IRL world evil. Those who play on PVE servers mostly want some utopia to enjoy, something we can never have IRL. 

 

I don't want to fight my neighbours or other players, If I wanted to do so, I would go to Chaos. 

Edited November 13, 2020 by Platyna

[Blazecraze 438]

5 hours ago, TheTrickster said:

I think it is being either overlooked or forgotten that "Deed it or lose it" is a warning to owners, along the lines of "Don't leave your handbag on the front seat of your car with the window down" .  The warning about the handbag does not invite or excuse the theft of the handbag should that happen, and the the warning about deeding does not invite or excuse the theft of your stuff should that happen.   

 

But you cannot steal on Freedom servers - its actually not possible.

It's only possible to 'steal' off of the deed - but if you find a BSB on the side of the road, or at an old mine entrance, and it's not deeded - is it really stealing to take those decaying resources?
If a tree is within a perimeter, is it stealing? I don't believe so - if it was - the game would prevent you from doing so.
Taking resources that someone has knowingly left in the public space and has not taken home with them for any reason - they have made the decision to put them out there knowing they have no claim on them.

 

25 minutes ago, Platyna said:

 If you leave a handbag on the back seat of your car and someone will take it, it will be still theft. This is a common definition of theft. And we, the people (sic!) have a right to have the written rules, we all accept as playing the game means accepting them, to have them upheld and applied. Deed it or lose it a good rule for Chaos not for Independence. It is okay as a warning as GMs can't run after every stolen handbag, but this never should be a rule. 

 

You can STEAL on Chaos so the 'Deed it or Lose it' rule doesn't even make sense on Chaos! Your deed doesn't protect anything!

 

 

 

Horrible, horrible example, sorry. I don't think you can compare someone planting a tree in a public space (Not on Deed = Public) to someone leaving their purse/handbag behind.

 

Once you put something off of deed, you are knowingly putting it out in the public!

 

Your example if you want it to be closer, would be "Purposely leaving your handbag on a public bench." because planting a tree off of deed isn't an ACCIDENTAL decision.

 

Related: I am surprised you have so much input on this topic Platyna, seeing as the entire southern end of Indy hates you for constantly messing with their highways, destroying public clay to put a highway in and altering highways AFTER THEY REQUESTED YOU NOT TO. LOL.

 

Jesus my dudes.

 

 

[Platyna 521]

If you take horses without permission from someone's building it is stealing, so you can steal on Freedom you just get no skillgain. 

 

You lack of arguments so you have to go ad personam?

 

Entire Southern Ind hates me for messing with highways? That's quite disappointing, because I mess with highways in a whole SFI, people even pay me to do it. 😉 I suggest going to examine markers on people's deeds before pulling such silly accusations. I removed 4 tiles that were located in the middle of the pavement, out of 60 using players donated TL, because all neighbouring deeds wanted a road there. 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2020 by Platyna

[Blazecraze 438]

I have arguments previously in the thread and my argument above is solid. I decided to include that last bit because I find it funny to have such an authority on common courtesy coming from someone that is so often called out for having none.

Also, I am familiar with the situation - I was a part of it  You won't see most of the disrespect as majority of them have you on that fancy pancy block list. 

 

In regards to stealing horses from someone's building - buildings have permissions.

 

1. If the player enabled those permissions, it was their decision to allow that.

 

 

2. If the house is not protected by a deed, it is their decision to open themselves to those possibilities. It is rude, but I would hardly call it stealing - and there are ways to ensure that your horse can't be taken, such as by placing down a tent and attaching the horse to the tent.

 

 

3. If the house is on a deed, this is not possible unless they have enabled both permissions for the house and the deed to do so - these aren't enabled by default mind you - meaning it was a conscious decision to do so.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Platyna 521]

You are very courteous in this thread, which speaks by itself if there is something about this matter you should speak about. Not only you are rude, you also lie about me and my community work, while you do none. Basically all new deeds are getting routed by me or using markers bought from me. When someone is looking for a deed in SE Ind they will most likely PM me to help them find a nice spot, because, due to my highway work I know this area. And what you do to help your local community flourish? Tell them they are losers because they forgot to lock their doors? 

[Blazecraze 438]

3 minutes ago, Platyna said:

You are very courteous in this thread

Thank you.

 

3 minutes ago, Platyna said:

 And what you do to help your local community flourish?

More than I could have time to explain.

 

4 minutes ago, Platyna said:

Tell them they are losers because they forgot to lock their doors? 

I tell them they are underprepared for the freedoms that come in an open world sandbox game and to ensure that their doors are locked and their permissions should be set to properly secure their goods - as anything taken without exploiting isn't breaking any rules. In fact, it's only common courtesy to educate players in that regard. In fact, I don't leave after helping someone until I am assured that they have re-set their permissions to disable those actions once again after I leave, as I am sure most people do too when finished helping at others deeds.

 

 

[Oakmaiden 23]

*anything taken without exploiting isn't breaking any rules*

 

While this is true, taking something that does not belong to you and which clearly has an owner is stealing.  Not against the rules, but still stealing.

 

I think the personal attacks on this thread are also definitely not appropriate in a "common courtesies" thread...

[Scottfree2 221]

there has always been a disconnect between players who consider the game to be an ethical and moral vacuum, and those whom play more or less in accordance with their real life values.

 

Some of these people are incapable on understanding that actions ingame can matter to those who are adversely affected by em, and as such are more to be pitied than reviled .. your dismay and outrage is meat and drink to em ..

 

Bottom line protect yourself, there are people here who dont share your values, and if youre unlucky enough to be vulnerable to theft when one of em happens by, they will take advantage if they can. 

 

this is a cancer on this game, and imo after many years watching the incredible lengths players will go to in order to grief each other the GMs have grown so accustomed that they have thrown in the towel on any meaningful attempt to encourage better behaviour.

 

Over and Out

[Shmeric 581]

Common courtesy, eh...

 

Do I need to do it, here and now?

But also: should I expect others to think as above, and see things as I do?

 

 

Behaviour, consideration, compassion, all the "psychology stuff" - we struggle with that in the real world, so massively wrapped and boxed in thousands of laws and directives, and we still manage to not get along.

Online game, an environment of anonymity, how much can we really expect any courtesies here at all? We can hope for pleasant people to walk by, but we must also be ready to accept those who see things differently.

 

In the end, as sad as it is, all still boils down to "if I care about it, I better deed it". Not a rule. A precaution.

 

[Tor 521]

It's lame and idiotic to go around and mess up with people perimeters and around, but also it's as same lame and idiotic to consider quarter of the server is yours and everyone should obligate to your unwriten rules or else i report you to my buddy GM

[Platyna 521]

10 minutes ago, Tor said:

It's lame and idiotic to go around and mess up with people perimeters and around, but also it's as same lame and idiotic to consider quarter of the server is yours and everyone should obligate to your unwriten rules or else i report you to my buddy GM

 

I think we are mainly concerned about perimeters here and mindless destruction of stuff made for common a good (roads, decorations, orchards, alleys etc.). 

Edited November 13, 2020 by Platyna

[Tor 521]

5 minutes ago, Platyna said:

 

I think we are mainly concerned about perimeters here and mindless destruction of stuff made for common a good (roads, decorations, orchards, alleys etc.). 

 

It's a common courtesy talk, actually. In general.

[Platyna 521]

Just now, Tor said:

 

It's a common courtesy talk, actually. In general.

 

Well I wrote that few posts ago. 😛 

[Tor 521]

No clue what you talking about and what does have that to do with my post

[Amata 400]

Yesterday evening a member of the Independence community brought this post specifically to my attention. Wanted to know why I hadn't replied to something that is so obviously right up my wheelhouse. (Answer: very bad news IRL has kept me off the grid this week). 

 

After 3 pages of responses, I can honestly jump in and say .... Hey look, there are some very strong personalities in the Wurm community. 

 

Seriously tho, I feel for @ChampagneDragon-  I have a somewhat similar post over in Suggestions, where I see responses and think, "my goodness, did you even read the original post before clicking 'submit reply'??" The OP could be more-or-less summarized by "hey, there's a lot of new players; this is a good time to share tips on those unspoken "common courtesies" that help make the wheels of Wurm keep turnin'" .... and the bulk of the content so far has been preoccupied with (1) an anecdote shared incidentally by the OP and/or (2) a very divisive debate over whether people are capable of giving a crap about others unless there is A Rule forcing them to. 

 

I know that I'm prone to making super long forum posts addressing multiple responses and approaching the topic from different angles.... but I think I'm gonna chunk things up for this one.... 

 

I'm not even sure at this point what, if anything, I want to engage with here. 

[Amata 400]

My views on this should come as no surprise to anyone at all. After all, 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. ✌🏼️🌱💜

 

I am just pleased as punch to see that there is finally a topic that draws together the incredibly unbelievable united support of myself, Ekcin, Trickster, Kelody, Zexos, Anthony,  and - gods help us all - Platyna. If I may, to the best of my ability, here is a collective manifesto regarding community & courtesy in Wurm: 

• This isn't a single-player, "user is sole authority," game.  It's a multi-player, "community & building," life-sim game ... interpersonal interactions with other players are inherent to game play.
   
• Just because an activity is not specifically breaking A Rule, doesn't make it good.
   
• Louder, for the players in the back - just because you can do it, doesn't mean you should. 
   
• Rules - especially unspoken community guidelines - should be accessible in game for those that don't use the forum; planted signs and active communication are key.
   
• If an action is going to affect the local community, make a conscious effort to discuss it with everyone nearby first
   
• The higher the impact of your actions, the more you should communicate about it.
   

• Perimeter lands specifically exist to prevent contiguous deeds and to ensure resources are kept accessible; perimeter "rights" are neither afforded to any player, nor excluded from any player. Perimeter usage is entirely a matter of interpersonal courtesy, not anyone's "right." 
   

• "Deed It or Lose It" is cautionary advice for deed owners to approach property and safety proactively. 
   

• "Deed It or Lose It" is not a viable excuse for poor behavior and/or actions serving self-interest at the detriment of others. Serve self-interests in the vast wild spaces of Wurm, and play nicely with your neighbors. 
   

• What constitutes "beautiful" or "pleasing" is up to a player's opinion. What constitutes "constructive gameplay" is up to a player's judgement. No individual player's opinion or judgement is a higher priority than any other player's opinion or judgement. Any space not specifically on-deed must be used by consensus of Local players. 
   

• When in doubt, ask and then collaborate. 
   

• In public lands, there are signs that an area is being actively used. Lumber trees in orderly rows; orchards being tended; decorative elements like flowerpots, hedges, and fencing, as well as any built structure in decent repair. Being on a deed''s perimeter is also a sign. The list of signs of life goes on... Learn the signs, and err on the side of respecting others' efforts to cultivate well-maintained public spaces. 
   

• Whenever possible.... If you cut down a tree please replant it. If you gather a resource, please make use of it or give it to another to use. Have a care for community assets like roadways, highways, tunnels, canals, and public resource nodes (mines, orchards, fishing spots, docks, etc). 
   

• Treat others as you would be treated.  This applies to their environment as well.
   

• If you don't own it, as much as possible, leave it as you found it.
   

• Polite, considerate, and respectful conduct makes life easier for everyone.
   

• But always remember: there are people here who don't share your values, and they will always take advantage if they can. 

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by Amata
because I'm obsessive

[Amata 400]

This breaks my heart. 
Is there any hope for humanity left?

 

 

Congrats Oreo and Beanbag, 
you have both made it onto 
~ Amata's Sht List ~
a very small, and very easily avoidable list.

No doubt, this news will likely make you smugly happy. 
Have fun with that. 

Edited November 14, 2020 by Amata

[TheTrickster 2,283]

I think I understand the draw of mountaintops.  Few neighbours and passers-by, and if those downhill do something unsightly you can just lift your view a bit and all is pretty again  😇.  Hermits are really hoopy froods.  I mean, those guys really know where their towels are.

 

Not that there is much in the way of neighbourhood "troubles" in my neck of the woods.  There has been a smidgen, but really nothing of lasting note.

[Amata 400]

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? (I really hope so, plz forum mods, don't delete this entire reply. If you need to please just remove this last part & the spoiler content below. It took me a while to sort out all of this response in my head, and I'd hate to lose the content). 
 

Spoiler

 

 

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.)

 

In short: decide what you mean, say specifically what you mean, put it in writing, and enforce it.  

Edited November 14, 2020 by Amata
I'm obsessive, still

[Amata 400]

There is one aspect of "The Rules" that has been touched on, in some way, by nearly every single response to this topic. 
Personally, I honestly think this discussion deserves it's own, pinned, ongoing thread - until the day that The Powers That Be actually decide to address the matter. That is....  The "Play Nice" Rule

 

Trickster graciously provided this thread with a copypaste of that rule, and it goes like this : 

On 11/11/2020 at 9:34 PM, TheTrickster said:

No, that is not literally the rule.  Here is the literal rule.

 

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.
A ) You may not block access to deeds, merchants, or structures not belonging to you.
B ) You may not call guards to kill penned animals on deeds you are not a citizen of. (They ain't hurting you!)
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.
D ) You may not intentionally create player traps. (i.e. Using siege shields to trap other players)
 
Punishment: You may be given a directive, warned, or even banned based on the situation.

 

As far as I can tell, boiling down the underlying base of any discussion that involves The "Play Nice" Rule...  the Wurm player base honestly has ONE - and only one - question about this rule that seriously needs to be resolved as soon as possible. 

 

 

Are elements A, B, C, and D of the "Play Nice" rule an enumerated list, or is the "Play Nice" rule found in the given "Definition" and elements A, B, C, and D are a few examples that Wurm staff simply wanted to address specifically?

 

 

In other words, when a player's actions break with A, B, C, and/or D  that is breaking the "Play Nice" Rule - but is it, or is it not, also breaking the "Play Nice" Rule when a player's actions break with the "Play Nice" definition but not specifically A, B, C, and/or D. Are Wurmians being asked to avoid any unconstructive or harmful activities - or does it only count as griefing if it falls under those 4 specific types of unconstructive / harmful actions? 

 

I have yet to find a discussion, debate, unresolved issue, or moderator-involved problem invoking the "Play Nice" rule that doesn't basically come down to a disagreement about how to understand what the "Play Nice" rule does or does not include. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Platyna 521]

Deed perimeters should be left alone, unless you have a permission or you are sure that the deed owner doesn't care. I use my neighbours perimeters and I made sure of the above. I have my neighbours to use part of my perimeters. Perimeter belong to a deed, it doesn't exist without a deed, so if you see something on the deed perimeter, don't touch it without asking. Perimeter is clearly marked  - you examine a tile and you see if it is perimeter. If people will follow this there we will have a lot less drama and bad blood in the game, as most problems are caused by the perimeter space, so-called "perimeter wars". 

Edited November 14, 2020 by Platyna

[Amadee 1,543]

18 hours ago, Scottfree2 said:

there has always been a disconnect between players who consider the game to be an ethical and moral vacuum, and those whom play more or less in accordance with their real life values.

 

Some of these people are incapable on understanding that actions ingame can matter to those who are adversely affected by em, and as such are more to be pitied than reviled .. your dismay and outrage is meat and drink to em ..

 

Bottom line protect yourself, there are people here who dont share your values, and if youre unlucky enough to be vulnerable to theft when one of em happens by, they will take advantage if they can. 

 

this is a cancer on this game, and imo after many years watching the incredible lengths players will go to in order to grief each other the GMs have grown so accustomed that they have thrown in the towel on any meaningful attempt to encourage better behaviour.

 

Over and Out

 

This ^^^

 

Also, I have observed over the years, (since early UO, late 90s), that the internet and online games tend to make a person's true character shine through.  This is my opinion and I'm sure some will disagree, and some may even be insulted if I hit a nerve I guess. *shrugs*  Sorry,  but if the shoe doesn't fit, then don't wear it.  It's not always true, I know, but I've come to believe it's true in the majority of cases.

 

I think kind, helpful people in game where they're anonymous and don't have to be nice, and who are always that way consistently, are likely to be that way in RL.  Those just putting on an act for devious purposes usually can't maintain that persona consistently or for long, and eventually it comes out.  And those who act towards others in ways they probably never do in RL, (you know, like when their nose is within reach of the other party's fist), are very likely showing their true colors.

 

Trying to have a conversation about "common courtesy" is a nice idea but unfortunately courtesy seems to no longer be very common in today's society, especially on line. I applaud ChampagneDragon's effort though.

 

 

Edited November 14, 2020 by Amadee
paragraphs lol