IRILI'S PROFILE
Irili
3198
I'm a college student majoring in electrical engineering. Yay, math! :D
My hobbies when I'm not working and paying bills and such are taekwondo, game making, game playing, cooking and reading.
I also devour fun by the barrel. *nom nom*
My hobbies when I'm not working and paying bills and such are taekwondo, game making, game playing, cooking and reading.
I also devour fun by the barrel. *nom nom*
Search
Filter
It_cares.png
What will you do with our tears once you have them Nessy? Does it go to a good cause like curing cancer or something?
"A Call to Arms for Decent Men"
I quite like the mute option. I don't necessarily agree with everything in the article but the fact of the matter is, if you don't like someone or something, flick that mute button on and don't listen to them.
Freedom of speech is an important right. However, does the United States Declaration of Independence not state "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as unalienable rights? Yes, harassing others may make an online bully happy. Where does his/her pursuit of happiness impede on others happiness?
I think there is a lot of gray area here which makes the problem so difficult to deal with. Personally, I don't feel threatened unless someone is physically trying to hurt me. Words don't really effect me that much because of how much of it I put up with in school. Other people don't feel the same though. People are different. Yes, freedom should come before safety unless we want to lose that freedom altogether. But that shouldn't be an excuse for acting like an asshat.
author=LockeZ
I'm in favor of free speech at any cost. If freedom of speech is costing people their happiness, or even their lives, then that's unfortunate but is preferable to censorship. It's the price you pay to live in a civilized world where you're not beheaded for speaking out against the state religion and it's not treason to suggest that your totalitarian leaders should be replaced.
Freedom of speech is an important right. However, does the United States Declaration of Independence not state "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as unalienable rights? Yes, harassing others may make an online bully happy. Where does his/her pursuit of happiness impede on others happiness?
I think there is a lot of gray area here which makes the problem so difficult to deal with. Personally, I don't feel threatened unless someone is physically trying to hurt me. Words don't really effect me that much because of how much of it I put up with in school. Other people don't feel the same though. People are different. Yes, freedom should come before safety unless we want to lose that freedom altogether. But that shouldn't be an excuse for acting like an asshat.
"A Call to Arms for Decent Men"
Just an article I found interesting. I've never experienced any kind of abuse online but I know plenty of people who have. Would you agree with some of the actions suggested here such as:
Do you think this is a problem that should be tackled by the gamers or the game companies?
Discuss. Oh, and the link to the full article below.
A Call to Arms for Decent Men
Mockery. In 1993 50 Ku Klux Klansmen marched through Austin, Texas. Five thousand anti-Klan protestors turned up to jeer at them. Best of all, several hundred lined the parade route and mooned the Klan in waves. The media ate it up, and the Klan looked ridiculous. The hurt that they wanted to cause was met not with anger but with derision. The juvenile delinquents are just like the Klan in 1993: anonymous in their high-tech bedsheets, and threatening, but in fact, a minority. Let's use our superior numbers and metaphorically moon the boys who can't behave. They're social inadequates, immature losers. Let's tell them so, loud and clear, in front of their friends.
Shut them up. The right to speak in a public forum should be limited to those who don't abuse it. James Portnow suggested this one in his Extra Credits video on harassment. Anyone who persistently abuses others gets automatically muted to all players. The only players who can hear them are those who choose to unmute them. Or another of James' suggestions: New users don't even get the right to talk. They have to earn it, and they keep it only so long as they behave themselves. This means a player can't just create a new account to start spewing filth again if they've been auto-muted. Build these features into your games.
Take away their means. If you're the father of a boy who behaves like this online, make it abundantly clear to him that it is unmanly and unacceptable, then deny him the opportunity to do it further. We don't let nine-year-olds misuse tools to hurt other people. Take away his cell phone, his console and his computer. He can learn to behave like a man, or he can turn in his homework in longhand like a child.
Anonymity is a privilege, not a right. Anonymity is a double-edged sword. A limited number of people need it in certain circumstances: children, crime victims, whistleblowers, people discussing their medical conditions, political dissidents in repressive regimes. But those people normally don't misuse their anonymity to abuse others; they're protecting themselves from abuse. I think the default setting in all online forums that are not intended for people at risk should require real names. After a user has demonstrated that they are a grown-up, then offer them the privilege of using a pseudonym. And take it away forever if they misuse it. I haven't used a nickname for years except in one place where all the readers know who I am anyway. Has it made me more careful about what I say? You bet. Is that a good thing? Damn right it is.
Impose punishments that are genuinely painful. This suggestion is extreme, but I feel it's both viable and effective. To play subscription-based or pay-as-you-go ("free-to-play-but-not-really") games, most players need to register a credit card with the game's provider. Include a condition in the terms of service that entitles the provider to levy extra charges for bad behavior. Charge $5 for the first infraction and double it for each subsequent one. This isn't all that unusual; if you smoke in a non-smoking hotel room, you are typically subject to a whopping extra charge for being a jerk.
Shut them up. The right to speak in a public forum should be limited to those who don't abuse it. James Portnow suggested this one in his Extra Credits video on harassment. Anyone who persistently abuses others gets automatically muted to all players. The only players who can hear them are those who choose to unmute them. Or another of James' suggestions: New users don't even get the right to talk. They have to earn it, and they keep it only so long as they behave themselves. This means a player can't just create a new account to start spewing filth again if they've been auto-muted. Build these features into your games.
Take away their means. If you're the father of a boy who behaves like this online, make it abundantly clear to him that it is unmanly and unacceptable, then deny him the opportunity to do it further. We don't let nine-year-olds misuse tools to hurt other people. Take away his cell phone, his console and his computer. He can learn to behave like a man, or he can turn in his homework in longhand like a child.
Anonymity is a privilege, not a right. Anonymity is a double-edged sword. A limited number of people need it in certain circumstances: children, crime victims, whistleblowers, people discussing their medical conditions, political dissidents in repressive regimes. But those people normally don't misuse their anonymity to abuse others; they're protecting themselves from abuse. I think the default setting in all online forums that are not intended for people at risk should require real names. After a user has demonstrated that they are a grown-up, then offer them the privilege of using a pseudonym. And take it away forever if they misuse it. I haven't used a nickname for years except in one place where all the readers know who I am anyway. Has it made me more careful about what I say? You bet. Is that a good thing? Damn right it is.
Impose punishments that are genuinely painful. This suggestion is extreme, but I feel it's both viable and effective. To play subscription-based or pay-as-you-go ("free-to-play-but-not-really") games, most players need to register a credit card with the game's provider. Include a condition in the terms of service that entitles the provider to levy extra charges for bad behavior. Charge $5 for the first infraction and double it for each subsequent one. This isn't all that unusual; if you smoke in a non-smoking hotel room, you are typically subject to a whopping extra charge for being a jerk.
Do you think this is a problem that should be tackled by the gamers or the game companies?
Discuss. Oh, and the link to the full article below.
A Call to Arms for Decent Men
NaGaDeMo Review Drive
Congrats you guys! And high fives all around, especially to those of you who reviewed a metric shit-ton of games.
Confrontation: Encounters and You
Need help
NaGaDeMo Review Drive
RPG Maker VXAce Damage Flow
@ Craze: Perhaps a simple script manipulation tutorial is in order?
Quite lovely Nessiah! Thanks for the information.
Quite lovely Nessiah! Thanks for the information.
I am back from the woods.
Features Explained - Recall Sphere
A very interesting concept for the save structure. It seems that if it was available to the general public though, that it would be misused.
A question: Would going back in type reverse your age? You said that Heridomus no longer was wounded. But did he revert to his previous age? If so, does he have all of the knowledge he had before? If so, how would you handle that in game?
A question: Would going back in type reverse your age? You said that Heridomus no longer was wounded. But did he revert to his previous age? If so, does he have all of the knowledge he had before? If so, how would you handle that in game?













