Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rinoa]

Pleasure? Oh baby.

Again, it was off topic and meant to lighten the situation a bit. All of this angst got me hot and heavy at such a late hour.

Priya, please ~ <3

No, but seriously back on topic.

At this point I want judges, not sure about GM's.

GASP. YOU REVEALED MY IDENTITY. HOW SHALL I EVER LIVE ON - jk.


I agree with a composed list of active role players or even veterans of roleplay (both mods and players alike) to be available as judges for roleplay. Granted, all must agree to it (those in the list). This is a good idea. Of course, when it gets out of hand, it goes up to a moderator that is either on or off the list. If not both. For unbiased conclusions.

[Ѕhadow]

Pleasure? Oh baby.

Again, it was off topic and meant to lighten the situation a bit. All of this angst got me hot and heavy at such a late hour.

Priya, please ~ <3

No, but seriously back on topic.

At this point I want judges, not sure about GM's.

GASP. YOU REVEALED MY IDENTITY. HOW SHALL I EVER LIVE ON - jk.


I agree with a composed list of active role players or even veterans of roleplay (both mods and players alike) to be available as judges for roleplay. Granted, all must agree to it (those in the list). This is a good idea. Of course, when it gets out of hand, it goes up to a moderator that is either on or off the list. If not both. For unbiased conclusions.

I agree with the list. That last bit though....moderator. I think it should then go to a few judges not just one mod.

[Rinoa]

Hence the if not both, for an unbiased conclusion.

It's a last resort kind of thing when things get out of hand. You'll have a moderator who is clued in about roleplay, and a moderator who isn't active with roleplay and will most likely have a different perspective on the scenario.

Again, that last bit is a last resort scenario. Or it could work as a council among the list, albeit that process of decision making and judging could take an extensive amount of time.

[KayentaMoenkopi]

I think that is a good idea. A varied perspective should keep things fair.

[Eric]

Alright alright, so let me get this straight. What "we" want is a group of people to act as judges over RP, overall, is that what I am getting?

Don't we already appointed judges when we can't solve things between ourselves? Don't we already have issues appointing judges when two separate RP streams come together in that rare instance?

What new, novel idea is being proposed here? That a consistent, set group of judges be established rather than one to be called upon in the hour of need? How in the blue blazes is the community going to vote when almost half of it does not even bother coming to the forums?

Have a MoTD in-game style voting system? Blogs? Posts in the village boards?

My negative put onto the table, I do see another light to what is being suggested, and it might be what is actually be asked for. Judges to be voted on right at the start of a RP, rather than halfway in. And while I am less opposed to that, I have to ask why a topic would even be needed to bring that up, as already a judge is called upon when RP conflict emerge.

Whether said judge is agreed upon by everyone in the RP is up for a coin toss, as it goes situation by situation (and the size of the RP), but I missed the Wario bucket on this one. Not to mention I would prefer a judge not involved in the RP to be making decisions on it. And I mean, really, not involved at all. 

...I think it was Genesis who nearly had a heart attack to see Bocchiere and myself RPing one day and getting along in Kirigakure. If we can bury the hatchet...and not in each other's skulls...I see no reason why everyone can not do the same...

I am willing to bet that it was not a RP fight that you two managed to get along in. While I agree with the idea that we need to bury the hatchet, the only time the hatchet even comes out is in a RP fight (or zone fight occasionally). Otherwise, either nothing is being done or folks are getting along (exceptions always exist).

When two groups start to zone, that's when things get tricky. Hence, the need for judges/referees. The issue is not how we RP in general, but in how we fight each other (IC and OOC too).

[Trev]

I don't know why we need set judges. If you need to call upon a "set" judge, you're honestly being childish. I've had no problem with really any rp. If any problems arose, I or my opponent simply asked to get a judge. We would spit names back and forth and agree on one, and their decision was law and we'd move on.

I don't even bother to argue anymore, and it's very discouraging when I see them on public boards, just loads of ooc complaining. Just pick a judge and be done with. The only way this doesn't work is if someone refused to agree upon a judge, or didn't like their decision (which is tough luck for them and warrants an auto-victory if they're being that difficult).

I guess I wouldn't mind set judges to go to, but it just seems unnecessary. I'd rather mutually pick one with my opponent.

[Ѕhadow]

I'm not moving towards a 'set'. I'm moving towards verified community picked judges that will get the job done if the job is needed to be done. Instead of the two picking someone they thought was competent and then finding out that he/she wasn't. These people are to be known and trusted by the community to effectively get stuff done. There doesn't have to be a number limit or anything and no one has to pick these people. However you should pick these people.

Darkshinobi is the only one I, or anyone put up as I guess they're waiting on me to make another topic for another candidate. Dark for the matter is by far being voted for instead of against as he fits all the things we listed as looked for when one becomes a 'judge'. One of the main reasons I've picked Dark before anyone else. He. Does. Not. Argue. With. Others. He's very logical and I'm about to start going on another fangirl rampage here, point is you all know how he is and that's why he was an obvious pick.

Also if you want someone to be voted, make a topic for em.

[Isaribi]

He. Does. Not. Argue. With. Others.

This is a reason against Dark, in my opinion. Argument and debate are one thing; harassment is another. Argument and debate allow the topic at hands to be refined; harassment is filled with ad hominem, abuse, etc.

There is a fine line between argument and abuse. If someone doesn't argue, that is a bad thing; it means their statements must be coming out of nowhere and are completely unrefined.

People who can't handle argument due to their sensitivity are even worse because they get offended by someone trying to refine a topic with them, which then turns into abuse in retaliation against argument presumed abuse.


We are on a text-based game. We have to use our words carefully in order to be effective. That involves arguing, but doesn't involve abuse. As long as people begin to understand that argument about refining and answering questions is necessary and stop getting upset about it, we won't need judges at all.

[Ѕhadow]

He. Does. Not. Argue. With. Others.

This is a reason against Dark, in my opinion. Argument and debate are one thing; harassment is another. Argument and debate allow the topic at hands to be refined; harassment is filled with ad hominem, abuse, etc.

There is a fine line between argument and abuse. If someone doesn't argue, that is a bad thing; it means their statements must be coming out of nowhere and are completely unrefined.

People who can't handle argument due to their sensitivity are even worse because they get offended by someone trying to refine a topic with them, which then turns into abuse in retaliation against argument presumed abuse.


We are on a text-based game. We have to use our words carefully in order to be effective. That involves arguing, but doesn't involve abuse. As long as people begin to understand that argument about refining and answering questions is necessary and stop getting upset about it, we won't need judges at all.

Isa it isn't being meant that way. He doesn't argue. That's not against him, it's FOR him.

Simple arguing on here often escalates to levels where it becomes full circle 'he said; she said' We don't need a judge doing that. Dark negates arguing in that he won't even if the others want to initiate it against him, he won't budge. He's not sensitive or anything else. Take me for example I've been debating with everyone on every single topic, but I won't argue with you all. Debate; that's it.

[Eric]

He. Does. Not. Argue. With. Others.

This is a reason against Dark, in my opinion. Argument and debate are one thing; harassment is another. Argument and debate allow the topic at hands to be refined; harassment is filled with ad hominem, abuse, etc.

There is a fine line between argument and abuse. If someone doesn't argue, that is a bad thing; it means their statements must be coming out of nowhere and are completely unrefined.

People who can't handle argument due to their sensitivity are even worse because they get offended by someone trying to refine a topic with them, which then turns into abuse in retaliation against argument presumed abuse.


We are on a text-based game. We have to use our words carefully in order to be effective. That involves arguing, but doesn't involve abuse. As long as people begin to understand that argument about refining and answering questions is necessary and stop getting upset about it, we won't need judges at all.

Isa it isn't being meant that way. He doesn't argue. That's not against him, it's FOR him.

Simple arguing on here often escalates to levels where it becomes full circle 'he said; she said' We don't need a judge doing that. Dark negates arguing in that he won't even if the others want to initiate it against him, he won't budge. He's not sensitive or anything else. Take me for example I've been debating with everyone on every single topic, but I won't argue with you all. Debate; that's it.

Should I get the princess and the frog quote and change it around?

Argue, debate it's all the same thing yes?

No! *whacks with stick and launches into song about whatcha need*

On a serious note, what I think ShadowX meant is that Dark does not go back and forth. He states his point and goes about his business.

Granted, it has been forever, if ever, since I have fought Dark, so I can't verify said claim that he does not at all argue with folks. However, I do know him well enough to say that he is not one to let a pickaxe dig a mine.

We debate things on the forum all the time. We argue too. Sometimes (more often than not if it's a fight we're going over) jabs are taken and all that stuff typical of people.

I'm not moving towards a 'set'. I'm moving towards verified community picked judges that will get the job done if the job is needed to be done. Instead of the two picking someone they thought was competent and then finding out that he/she wasn't...

You don't want a set group of folks to be called on for judging, but you do want a set group of folks to be called on for judging. Huh? While not "set" in stone (excuse my poor attempt at wordplay) verified community judges and "set" community judges are one in the same. In which see previous post for my opinion on that.

[Ѕhadow]

He. Does. Not. Argue. With. Others.

This is a reason against Dark, in my opinion. Argument and debate are one thing; harassment is another. Argument and debate allow the topic at hands to be refined; harassment is filled with ad hominem, abuse, etc.

There is a fine line between argument and abuse. If someone doesn't argue, that is a bad thing; it means their statements must be coming out of nowhere and are completely unrefined.

People who can't handle argument due to their sensitivity are even worse because they get offended by someone trying to refine a topic with them, which then turns into abuse in retaliation against argument presumed abuse.


We are on a text-based game. We have to use our words carefully in order to be effective. That involves arguing, but doesn't involve abuse. As long as people begin to understand that argument about refining and answering questions is necessary and stop getting upset about it, we won't need judges at all.

Isa it isn't being meant that way. He doesn't argue. That's not against him, it's FOR him.

Simple arguing on here often escalates to levels where it becomes full circle 'he said; she said' We don't need a judge doing that. Dark negates arguing in that he won't even if the others want to initiate it against him, he won't budge. He's not sensitive or anything else. Take me for example I've been debating with everyone on every single topic, but I won't argue with you all. Debate; that's it.

Should I get the princess and the frog quote and change it around?

Argue, debate it's all the same thing yes?

No! *whacks with stick and launches into song about whatcha need*

On a serious note, what I think ShadowX meant is that Dark does not go back and forth. He states his point and goes about his business.

Granted, it has been forever, if ever, since I have fought Dark, so I can't verify said claim that he does not at all argue with folks. However, I do know him well enough to say that he is not one to let a pickaxe dig a mine.

We debate things on the forum all the time. We argue too. Sometimes (more often than not if it's a fight we're going over) jabs are taken and all that stuff typical of people.

I'm not moving towards a 'set'. I'm moving towards verified community picked judges that will get the job done if the job is needed to be done. Instead of the two picking someone they thought was competent and then finding out that he/she wasn't...

You don't want a set group of folks to be called on for judging, but you do want a set group of folks to be called on for judging. Huh? While not "set" in stone (excuse my poor attempt at wordplay) verified community judges and "set" community judges are one in the same. In which see previous post for my opinion on that.

All of what you said except by 'set' is I don't want people to think those are the only ones they can go to. Those are just the verified ones.

[Eric]

So, what's so special about being verified then?

[Ѕhadow]

So, what's so special about being verified then?

Players know you can be trusted more so than others.

[Eric]

So, what's so special about being verified then?

Players know you can be trusted more so than others.

If we have to take a vote on that sort of thing, then I question the legitimacy of said verified chars. Among the judges both verified and not, there are certain views on how RP should be dictated; they may or may not adapt to the party in question in doing so.

What I am getting at is that people already know who they would pick as a judge; verifying seems both unnecessary and a sort of uncalled for propping for certain players. Some are more suitable for judging RP than others, but this "verification by community vote" feels like a way of discounting decent, unbaised judges in favor of the ones who are verified of sorts.

Which, again, is a bit unecessary imho.

[Ѕhadow]

So, what's so special about being verified then?

Players know you can be trusted more so than others.

If we have to take a vote on that sort of thing, then I question the legitimacy of said verified chars. Among the judges both verified and not, there are certain views on how RP should be dictated; they may or may not adapt to the party in question in doing so.

What I am getting at is that people already know who they would pick as a judge; verifying seems both unnecessary and a sort of uncalled for propping for certain players. Some are more suitable for judging RP than others, but this "verification by community vote" feels like a way of discounting decent, unbaised judges in favor of the ones who are verified of sorts.

Which, again, is a bit unecessary imho.

Rp isn't so vastly different that it needs to be dictated differently. There are details that impact the decision, yes. They get to pick the judge as always.

What's the point of verifying anything then? In this case it's to let players who may not know who to trust, have people they can turn to. Sure people like you and I are well adapted in who to trust as a judge and who not to. However not everyone is us.

Verified = You can trust this player, known by the community, ect.

Once again not everyone knows. Some rando could pose and be like I'm so good at rp and can judge really great, yet they can't.