wankgate | 251: back in my day wank meant something

251: back in my day wank meant something

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I don't know. I think I'd be wary of any mod team that ignored a current players request whether they were the problem party or not. You're knowingly inviting future issues into your game at that point. Along with saying you don't care about your current player bases comfort level.

Yeah but juu is fucking psycho so that point misses

She has issues with several perfectly kind and reasonable players. I don't think banning those players when she's the issue in those instances makes sense.

I think trying to join a space with someone you know has issues with you could be an issue itself.

When the issues are the kind Juu has with people - up to and including opting out of a single character she plays while playing with her others - I don't think it's on the other player to avoid games she's in. Someone going insane about polite behavior should not necessitate the other party avoiding games they're in. They can just not interact.

Deets? Keep hearing about Juu in every single wg post and everyone just posts deetless shit and nothing comes out of it

If Juu is such a fucking psycho, banned in so many games, and has had issues with so many people, someone has gotta have some deets ffs

hi juu

hi gsai

STOP DEADNAMING ME I GO BY G NOW

Ah but how does the other party know the issues go beyond "I opted out of playing with their one character" which is something that in a big enough game shouldn't matter? Like they could never interact at all in s big game, which I would say fm is.

Also I like to think mods would consider a ban of someone if more than one player had complaints then just one player having complaints that may not be anything ban worthy. (Ie: one person is probably a personality clash, multiple people is something else.)

+1 if it were anyone other than juu then i would probably agree with that point, but

unless someone is a big name wanker a lot of these "problem player" issues are probably petty interpersonal bullshit.

i'd tell the concerned player to put in a firm dni with the person they don't want to write with, and tell the one apping in that a condition of being accepted is they don't tag or otherwise contact this player and they'll be banned if they do.

that should be enough for everyone to play nice. definitely wouldn't pre-ban someone otherwise harmless because one player doesn't get on with them. that's literally what dnis are for.

+10000000 THIS

mods still have to exercise common sense and independently decide whether a player represents a liability, anon, or else they risk players asking to effectively veto someone else from joining because they thought they looked their way funny in the grocery aisle. you have to protect your current playerbase's comfort within reason.

this happened in a game i was in back in the day. the mods had a policy where if x amount of players didn't want someone in a game, they had effective veto power over apps. players being caught abusing this privilege to prevent people from apping characters they reserved out from under their butt buddies was part of the reason the game ended up imploding.

Precisely

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

251: back in my day wank meant something

Re: GAME PET PEEVES

Re: GAME PET PEEVES

+1

-1

Re: -1

Re: -1

Re: -1

Re: -1

Re: -1

-1

Re: GAME PET PEEVES

Re: GAME PET PEEVES

Re: GAME PET PEEVES

Re: GAME PET PEEVES

+1

Re: GAME PET PEEVES