Sign in to follow this  
Tomatoes

My one rule

Recommended Posts

Some of you may have seen me post it already, however, in order to clear up some confusions im starting this thread. Its for those of you who don't get it to ask questions about it.

 

"It is not acceptable to cause distress to an individual without their consent", where 'distress' is defined a an interruption or interference to someone's ability to survive, succeed, and be safe.

 

I understand some of you may not get this easily, because its simple nature beguiles just how complex it is. it works for an individual and for groups of individuals as well. 

 

Please, ask any questions about it that you have. including those that may be you thinking i broke my own rule. (in other words, if you think i broke my own rule, tell me how i did so)

Edited by Tomatoes
clarifcation
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only Darnok and Drayka could handle such big dose of overthinking.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wilczan said:

Only Darnok and Drayka could handle such big dose of overthinking.

 

On reflection, I'll take that as a compliment. :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all 100% understand you. Instead of taking a simplified route of explaining something you take a 5 mile hike that you have to do on your hands and knees to explain and come back to the point at hand 5 miles later. I think Dr. Phil got bored after retirement and is here to harass us now... 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q. If 'everyone understands this', why do so many people not follow it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tomatoes said:

 

"It is not acceptable to cause distress to an individual without their consent", where 'distress' is defined a an interruption or interference to someone's ability to survive, succeed, and be safe.

 

 

What's the point of communication if you can only say what other person wants to hear and not express your opinion?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Darnok said:

 

What's the point of communication if you can only say what other person wants to hear and not express your opinion?

That's like saying what's the point of having a hammer, if I am not permitted to use it to bash someone's head in. Opinions can be weaponised too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My farm is just out of view from where I spend most of my playtime, so when I finally get within render-range, often I discover the whole tomato crop has failed.

 

That's how tomatoes has effed me over recently. Your mileage may differ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Drayka said:

Q. If 'everyone understands this', why do so many people not follow it?

Greeting somebody with "good day" could trigger them .. because it's a minute before or after certain hour.

You're responsible for what you say or do, and not for what somebody else thinks you said or wrote. Simple as that.

Go figure.

 

  --edit

4 hours ago, Darnok said:

 

What's the point of communication if you can only say what other person wants to hear and not express your opinion?

exactly

+1

 

  

4 hours ago, Drayka said:

That's like saying what's the point of having a hammer, if I am not permitted to use it to bash someone's head in. Opinions can be weaponised too.

google definition for hammer, see what it's used for, if you think it's instantly triggering you do harm to others with it.. seek medical advice

Edited by Finnn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Finnn said:

google definition for hammer, see what it's used for, if you think it's instantly triggering you do harm to others with it.. seek medical advice

🤣 Awesome 1-liner @Finnn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait!  If someone does not like something then they would say right?  Then again, it is up to you how you react to the person who is bothering you. You don't even need to interact with them. Cause whatever causes reactions and triggers is a story that you are telling yourself, to define the world.

 

You can attach any sort of reality/story to a person's behaviour. Then once you have done that, you can fight and insult each other if you so wish.  I mean, you don't need to fight each other. It is all a choice really.

You decide what you want to do and how you want to react.  Online and offline. 👽

Edited by Zexos
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zexos said:

accidental misqote here sry.

 

9 hours ago, Finnn said:
13 hours ago, Darnok said:

What's the point of communication if you can only say what other person wants to hear and not express your opinion?

 

who said you are not allowed to state your own opinion? this rule doesn't forbid it, and in fact encourages that. then as long as you are not attacking me in a way that threatens my survival, success, or safety, its allowed.

 

Edited by Tomatoes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zexos said:

You decide what you want to do and how you want to react.  Online and offline

couldn't have said this better myself personally.

 

4 hours ago, Zexos said:

You can attach any sort of reality/story to a person's behaviour

all behavior is learned from our parents, we see how to react to stimuli based on how they react. as we grow up and older we incorporate that into our personalities, weather(probably wrong spelling but its w/e atm) we want to or not.

 

4 hours ago, Zexos said:

Wait!  If someone does not like something then they would say right?  Then again, it is up to you how you react to the person who is bothering you.

you would assume so, but not everyone thinks in the same manner, or understands things in the same order. It truly boggles the mind. some people will just lash out randomly without knowing why they do so, some people try to help others see others points of views, some yet still do neither and that is their choice still. you cannot fault someone for the choices they make, because not everyone understands things in the same manner.

 

14 hours ago, PvtPile said:

*snipped*

this is a serious conversation, please no memes

 

9 hours ago, Ajala said:

My farm is just out of view from where I spend most of my playtime, so when I finally get within render-range, often I discover the whole tomato crop has failed.

 

That's how tomatoes has effed me over recently. Your mileage may differ.

same for the trolls. i get it you want to distract from convo, but not here. find somewhere else please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Wilczan said:

Only Darnok and Drayka could handle such big dose of overthinking.

actually its easy to understand, just a lot of people need it spelled out for them, there are at least five separate terms that need identified regularly.

 

  1. survive - to remain alive or in existence
  2. succeed - a) to turn out well, or b)to attain a desired object or end - specifically success of survival
  3. safe - free from harm or risk - specifically, to an individuals ability to survive
  4. individual - every human on the planet
  5. consent - to give assent or approval

most people i talk to about my rule always need one of them terms properly defined for them. strange but true.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Tomatoes said:

Some of you may have seen me post it already, however, in order to clear up some confusions im starting this thread. Its for those of you who don't get it to ask questions about it.

 

"It is not acceptable to cause distress to an individual without their consent", where 'distress' is defined a an interruption or interference to someone's ability to survive, succeed, and be safe.

 

I understand some of you may not get this easily, because its simple nature beguiles just how complex it is. it works for an individual and for groups of individuals as well. 

 

Please, ask any questions about it that you have. including those that may be you thinking i broke my own rule. (in other words, if you think i broke my own rule, tell me how i did so)

 

 

If I try to read between the lines and interpret this as a rule you try to force on the game and feel threatened by it. Are you then breaking your own rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this because we knocked down a wall on your deed and you woke up your wife?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Drayka said:

That's like saying what's the point of having a hammer, if I am not permitted to use it to bash someone's head in. Opinions can be weaponised too.

 

An opinion that hurts someone who is wrong is still valid. Only evil people believe that a man over whom no one has control would do bad things because they themselves are evil and see no other options.

That's why they want to be in control of everyone and everything even other people opinions.

 

 

Edited by Darnok
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mclavin said:

Is this because we knocked down a wall on your deed and you woke up your wife?

 

Imagine playing a game in pvp mode and you go out trying to pvp and all of a sudden Tomatoes joins Local chat:)

 

OpFzGll.png

 

So for next time can Panda please ask for permission to come attack the deed and maybe promise to do it in sign language only? :)

 

L.E.: this is how the fight would look like:

 

 

 

Edited by Cipacadrinho
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tomatoes said:
  •  
  • safe - free from harm or risk - specifically, to an individuals ability to survive

why u even on chaos

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Jorma said:

 

 

If I try to read between the lines and interpret this as a rule you try to force on the game and feel threatened by it. Are you then breaking your own rule?

dont read between the lines and apply it without 'reading into it' precise definitions. 

 

7 hours ago, Mclavin said:

Is this because we knocked down a wall on your deed and you woke up your wife?

no this is supposed to be a serious question and answer thread. People be all up in arms over me even stating my rule, and i don't get why. Everyone should have the ability to verbalize it and use it, even if they didn't 'come up with it themselves'

 

4 hours ago, Cipacadrinho said:

 

Imagine playing a game in pvp mode and you go out trying to pvp and all of a sudden Tomatoes joins Local chat:)

 

OpFzGll.png

 

So for next time can Panda please ask for permission to come attack the deed and maybe promise to do it in sign language only? :)

 

L.E.: this is how the fight would look like:

 

 

 

Cipaku, i understand you are mad, can we please keep our personal issues private please? no need to drag the REST of Wurm into it.

 

3 hours ago, icenrns said:

why u even on chaos

 

Icenrns, its because to order to survive one needs a challenge that is within ones own capabilities. If there is no challenge why would one bother to attempt to survive, yet that challenge can't be too extreme or one would think 'what's the point'

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this