Print

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

[Silas Vitalia]

rawr

[Lyn Farel]

Of course, we can't 'call anyone out' here. 

Oh we can, and I do. I got the Catacombs to prove it.

[Morwen Lagann]

We don't exactly have a rule against calling people out, specifically. It's how it's done that matters as far as the rules go - there's usually a few ways to phrase something that aren't against the rules. It's up to you to figure those ways out and post accordingly.

Of course, if you do it and the post ends up in the Catacombs, you're doing it wrong.

[Katrina Oniseki]

[Louella Dougans]

the pf for eve, has capsuleers almost omniscient. This would include access to various "Gal-Net" resources, amongst other things. I.e. the evelopedia, and all the factoids that it contains.

which means, ANY character who asks a question along the lines of "Is it true that in the Gallente Federation, there is a custom to do X ?", is, according to the PF, either trolling, or Doing It Wrong.

If it is a genuine question about cultures and stuff, then, according to the PF, they could just look it up, instantly, because of Capsuleer Omniscience. Therefore, they are Doing It Wrong, because of their ignorance of their own omniscience.

So then, it must be that they are Trolling, in an attempt to have other characters say something stupid, which can then be Instantly Called Out, because of Omniscience, and/or revealing other characters own ignorance of their own omniscience.

So, according to pf, then worldbuilding is Doing It Wrong, as capsuleers can instantly look it up, and see that nothing of the sort exists. Some worldbuilding is accepted by the players though, which means that the players are, simply doing it wrong. Everyone that accepts anything that another player says, is doing it wrong.

Kaztropol doesn't exist, the Tyrathlion estates don't exist, Auever Beach doesn't exist, Diana Kim's Secret Forbidden Gallente Pleasure Palace certainly doesn't exist, and so on and so on.

Everyone Is Wrong About Everything.

Lolrp.

[Samira Kernher]

the pf for eve, has capsuleers almost omniscient. This would include access to various "Gal-Net" resources, amongst other things. I.e. the evelopedia, and all the factoids that it contains.

which means, ANY character who asks a question along the lines of "Is it true that in the Gallente Federation, there is a custom to do X ?", is, according to the PF, either trolling, or Doing It Wrong.

If it is a genuine question about cultures and stuff, then, according to the PF, they could just look it up, instantly, because of Capsuleer Omniscience. Therefore, they are Doing It Wrong, because of their ignorance of their own omniscience.

No more than someone doing this IRL considering our access to things like Wikipedia. That's not "trolling" or "doing it wrong", it's "willful ignorance" and/or "failure to use available information resources", both of which are done by people all the time despite easy access to that information.

[Louella Dougans]

No more than someone doing this IRL considering our access to things like Wikipedia. That's not "trolling" or "doing it wrong", it's "willful ignorance" and/or "failure to use available information resources", both of which are done by people all the time despite easy access to that information.

maybe, but we're people irl, not eidetic memoried cyborgs with inbuilt intertube implants.

[Laurentis Thiesant]

No more than someone doing this IRL considering our access to things like Wikipedia. That's not "trolling" or "doing it wrong", it's "willful ignorance" and/or "failure to use available information resources", both of which are done by people all the time despite easy access to that information.

maybe, but we're people irl, not eidetic memoried cyborgs with inbuilt intertube implants.

not if I'm piloting my capital ship on the bridge with a joy stick #doingitright 

[Dessau]

Ah, the rare and beautiful Nyx wingover.

[Laurentis Thiesant]

Prime Example of 'Doing it Wrong':

[Esna Pitoojee]

Put more directly, what Lou is trying to say is that if all the Evelopedia pages are taken IC, then it presents some issues because it embodies three things which no RL encyclopedia or information source can claim:
- Universal access among the capsuleer class, so that anyone who is a capsuleer (i.e., anyone who is a player) can or should have knowledge of the information in it.
- An objectively factual writing position, as defined by Word Of CCP; particularly problematic in historical matters as bringing the Evelopedia into IC discussions can instantly dampen "who is right about what happened" conversations.
- Building on the above, the only confirmable IC source of information (when news articles are included). Anything someone decides to worldbuild in RP can potentially be ignored by furiously screaming "BUT ITS NOT IN THE EVELOPEDIA!"

In actuality, I only see these issues come up periodically. They crop up every once in a while, but fortunately most people seem to realize that wielding a hammer of that size is as likely to leave you the "victor" of an RP wasteland. People may use information from the Evelopedia as points in their discussion, but rare is the person who insists that arguing things written in the Evelopedia makes them automatically right.

[Lyn Farel]

CCP never tried when writing articles in the eve wiki, or at least most of the time, to present every fact they tell through different lenses. So it ends up as some kind of unilateral canon that has been more thought like an OOC rulebook for a GM than a true IC encyclopedia... Which is still used as an IC encyclopedia by players nevertheless.

There is already other topics about people linking eve wiki articles again and again to win RP.

That's also why I really love rulebooks that actually present their lore and universe each time through the words and lens of a different character at every page.

____________________


Also, on world building, it's a very fine tool when it doesn't cross suspension of disbelief, scale, or just out of place technological boogaloo.

[Ollie]

In actuality, I only see these issues come up periodically. They crop up every once in a while, but fortunately most people seem to realize that wielding a hammer of that size is as likely to leave you the "victor" of an RP wasteland. People may use information from the Evelopedia as points in their discussion, but rare is the person who insists that arguing things written in the Evelopedia makes them automatically right.

Probably the most salient point from any of those made in either Louella or Esna's posts.

We're fortunate to have a group of RPers who - by and large - actually want to have interaction and are mature enough to know how to seed and build RP opportunities for themselves and others in order to do that. Compared to some RP communities out there there's a noticeable lack of participants trying to 'win RP'.

[Lyn Farel]

Most people on the IGS were constantly trying to win RP when I left. I hold no illusion that this has somehow changed.

Half of the time on debates, you didn't have to wait very long for someone to link an eve wiki article to prove that he was right by the rule of the Canon. That's OOC behavior, and pretty fine OOCly. But definitely not ICly.

[Ollie]

Most people on the IGS were constantly trying to win RP when I left. I hold no illusion that this has somehow changed.

Half of the time on debates, you didn't have to wait very long for someone to link an eve wiki article to prove that he was right by the rule of the Canon. That's OOC behavior, and pretty fine OOCly. But definitely not ICly.

My definition of 'winning RP' was something along the lines of standing 'victorious' over the RP wasteland that Esna described. I see it attempted occasionally, but not usually from the majority of those participating. As I said, there are RP communities out there where it's far more common.

There's very little quoting on the IGS from sources like Evelopedia now, Lyn, if there ever was. It's happened from time to time, certainly, but I don't know that I'd ever categorise it as being done by 'most people' or 'half of the time'.

Even if this were the case, I think that the next point you make - that it's categorically 'OOC behaviour' and 'definitely not IC' - is arguable (and has been argued at length here in the past). I think that Esna's point was that it's a very fine line we walk when using information from the wiki ICly and one we have to be quite conscious of if we're to avoid pitfalls associated with crossing it, particularly during in-character debates. There's a difference between carefully presenting information in the wiki in the context of an IC argument/discussion in order to generate conflict or tension that then drives that discussion forward compared with using it as a blunt instrument to hammer those opposing your character's ideas into submission and subsequently shutting the RP down altogether.

The difference quite possibly stems from the attitudes of the players involved. Perhaps those that are invested in their characters to the point of seeing their successes and failures as extensions of their own personal achievements are perhaps more likely to be the ones that want to 'win RP' and therefore more predisposed to using information in the wiki sledgehammer style rather than as a more collaborative tool?