Forums » Role Playing
It takes two. One to speak, and another to hear. Bojan jabbed, and Axion let it bother him. Bojan's action is the first fault, and no one has room to fault Axiom, until they have first faulted Bojan. For as great a fault it is of Axiom, it is a greater fault of Bojan.
We do not need the guides to censor everything said. Many things are dealt with by the players themselves.
I am not concerned if Bojan gets a hand slap for this single instance, but I am concerned that anyone would try to defend or excuse that type of behavior, or fault Axiom, without first faulting Bojan.
Axiom is expressing that he does not find the behavior acceptable. I believe it is his right to express that. I believe that in his expressing that, care should be taken to not engage in that behavior with him.
I shoot people. They ask me to stop. I tell them no. It is part of the game. Attacking people IRL is not part of the game.
Players who have multiple complaints against them, for things that are not part of playing the game, should be corrected.
We do not need the guides to censor everything said. Many things are dealt with by the players themselves.
I am not concerned if Bojan gets a hand slap for this single instance, but I am concerned that anyone would try to defend or excuse that type of behavior, or fault Axiom, without first faulting Bojan.
Axiom is expressing that he does not find the behavior acceptable. I believe it is his right to express that. I believe that in his expressing that, care should be taken to not engage in that behavior with him.
I shoot people. They ask me to stop. I tell them no. It is part of the game. Attacking people IRL is not part of the game.
Players who have multiple complaints against them, for things that are not part of playing the game, should be corrected.
My usual reaction to trolls that spam the chat (Axiom included) in-game is: "the moron is strong with this one". After that I usually put them on /ignore (as I did with Axiom).
Does this, fairly usual, statement (and action) of mine make me the perfect example for your post above or does it maybe warrant a 'divine' intervention because I hurt his feelings in-game and ignored him?
In other words: do I have to let anyone troll and spew insults at my account and just patiently wait till they exhausted their complete repertoire or am I allowed to make a brief comment and do /ignore?
Does this, fairly usual, statement (and action) of mine make me the perfect example for your post above or does it maybe warrant a 'divine' intervention because I hurt his feelings in-game and ignored him?
In other words: do I have to let anyone troll and spew insults at my account and just patiently wait till they exhausted their complete repertoire or am I allowed to make a brief comment and do /ignore?
"the moron is strong with this one" is negative, but if "IRL" is not attached, then it can at least be interpreted as being in the context of VO. A lot of negative can be exchanged, in the context of VO, and in some cases, is even in the spirit of VO. One of the lines is when statements no longer apply to VO.
So, to answer your question, in my opinion, no, "the moron is strong with this one", is not necessarily an automatic "crossing of the line". It is not necessarily not crossing the line either, and I might have trouble defending it without a lot of context. Further, if the recipient(s) state that they find such statements offensive, (and then actually attempt to disengage from that level of interaction), then failing to discontinue that level of interaction could be interpreted as harassment. There is a lot of room for interpretation here. If someone objects to me calling them a moron, but then continues to behave moronically, I, personally, may continue to state that I find their behavior moronic. It takes two. Both have the option of shutting up, and using /ignore. Both failing to do so, may very well put both on the firing line.
I threaten in game actions all the time. I will kill SKV at every convenient opportunity, and I will express this intent publicly, and objecting to said expression is unlikely to shut me up. It is part of the game. If a given statement can not be backed up by in game action, consider if it is even worth saying. I don't care what you say, if you can't back it up. You are not only wasting your breath, but further, expressing yourself by any means other than action is interpreted by me, that you feel impotent.
So, to answer your question, in my opinion, no, "the moron is strong with this one", is not necessarily an automatic "crossing of the line". It is not necessarily not crossing the line either, and I might have trouble defending it without a lot of context. Further, if the recipient(s) state that they find such statements offensive, (and then actually attempt to disengage from that level of interaction), then failing to discontinue that level of interaction could be interpreted as harassment. There is a lot of room for interpretation here. If someone objects to me calling them a moron, but then continues to behave moronically, I, personally, may continue to state that I find their behavior moronic. It takes two. Both have the option of shutting up, and using /ignore. Both failing to do so, may very well put both on the firing line.
I threaten in game actions all the time. I will kill SKV at every convenient opportunity, and I will express this intent publicly, and objecting to said expression is unlikely to shut me up. It is part of the game. If a given statement can not be backed up by in game action, consider if it is even worth saying. I don't care what you say, if you can't back it up. You are not only wasting your breath, but further, expressing yourself by any means other than action is interpreted by me, that you feel impotent.