knppel

Sadly there is: We recently had two scripts added (livestream and cctv) that both suffer, besides other bugs, from the same issue: While using them, the player is restricted from using the local chat tools (which are mandatory to roleplay on a text-based server, mind).

Did this guy seriously write an essay about other people being power hungry over a freaking video game? Smh. This here is the real issue we have as community: Opposed to talk about how shitty or enjoyable our rp experience together is, we treat roleplay quality as a "sensitive" topic that is only to be submitted in private reports the accused does not even get to see (unless staff leaks, which it does, but this is a different topic). Our all rp would be better if we openly talked together instead to . Just my 2 cents as someone who, quote again, was not involved and doesn't know shit. My guess: it can't have too much tea in it as elsewise I'd heard of it

I'm so pretty

Comment: TheRealCarrySaunders Name: Ironically enough Noah Wade is exactly what he attacked Marcus Cambridge for all the past year until Hank was elected: Not elected. He's never had to deal with the consequences of his ridiculously low public approval ratings (they are low. Doubt me? Go out and freaking ASK people like I do. Most of them never heard of him even). Needless to point out- what sort of democratic understanding is to expect from a man that tries to bypass democratic processes himself first and foremost? Answer to the rethorical question: The same as from Marcus Cambridge- non at all. Maybe we should first vote a governor and not a city council

Highly in agreement with this. Take in account with such scripts that player-to-player interaction is the base core of our game and thus must be enabled at all times when logged in and acting in character!

I don't make it mandatory. Personally, I feel like A. there's too much metagaming when the ooc motive of creating a cool scene influences ic actions, and B. even if I play absolutely genuine I'll cherry-pick screens where my char/faction will look like they got their shit together (even when this claim might not uphold ic at all times). Consequently, screenshot threads at best offer a selective, at worst a strongly twisted impression of the actual activities people engage in (exceptions state the rule as always). Last but not least, showcasing story development is also the ultimate incitement for other players to metagame: This happens in two ways, the obvious conscious one -where people take knowledge of someone else's events and let their char's actions be influenced by this despite not having heard ic-, and less malevolent but equally disrupting to the game flow, the subconscious one when stuff published in ooc channels mixes with ic knowledge without the respective player fully differing the two. If we applied our server rules consequently, screenshots would be banned due to the aforementioned reason (inciting mg).

I eat them all when the bartender tries to give me my drink and finds out I am overloaded for me.🙂 Or wait, I used to. Now I have this box reminding me 😭

bit off topic but yes, according to recent studies chatgpt is already used (as supportive tool as you describe mostly) in 28% of job applications. Dating september, so by now we'll be at 35-40%. And yes, I mean irl now but the same applies ingame likely. After all we strive for realism!

On the other hand? I search for people who could write essays on a regular base for my faction. This effort is undermined when a single essay over yourself with 0 research can net anyone their very own business

This is false: At no given point did rules protect people from repercussions for the actions their char took. The issue stems from the recent (read: Less than 3 years old) addition of cks as a form of ooc punishment for not freezing. Shooting non-compliant people in, say , a robbery or any sort of comparable situation was at all times* an option well within the rules. What's relatively new is the mentioned -but not generally applied, only when someone cries over, irony, getting to shoot somebody- approach to ck characters off. And for what's worse, the rule name is false as displaying fear might just as much get you killed (it happens, again, not the act of murdering is the issue but that it's a widespread method to issue cks for which in the prior game design you needed either the agreement of the killed party or a really, really good cause such as money you do not just want to take out of someone's pocket but had been scammed for, or such). The addition of this rule has improved absolutely nothing, what it did was streamline robberies to guarantee success for the active party if they point a gun (as freezing is the only option covered in the rules, as unrealistic as it might be that we're ice cold planners that stand still under threat of violence). Consequently, robbing was more or less cancelled by the rules unless you do it on your own turf or walk across town on foot. *At least in any rp server I ever played on from samp-lsrp over M&B warband and Red Dead over to gtaw

Question, how do you define how you'd really act if you got a gun in your face? Oh right you can't. Also what you (and the rule) ignore is that ooc a lot of people have motivations to let their characters conduct murders (as this unironically causes development for criminal characters and having killed is mandatory in many groups to actually get in, or at least progress in higher ranks/inner circles). Murders that irl criminals would not conduct as the risk-profit-relation is just as much ignored by players who do not "really" go to jail if busted for murder- not to mention the unrealistically high chances to get away with crime we reflect. The rule is the worst we have in the ruleset, as it is alleged people act more "cautious" ic to value their e-life (LOL), but it turns a blind eye on the facts that A. criminals have a motive to murder for the sake of it and thus will pick up any reasons that allow them to do so (based on the rules), B. Fear is more divers than freezing and C. Permanently offing characters who get shot for, what is in fact fear of a gun in their face, serves no one but again the people playing would-be-murderers to feel like their killings have "more impact on the game world" (lol again, it doesn't, except for the ic friends of the deceased char). Ceterum censeo fear rules esse delendam

The whole rule is a bad idea- in theory it's supposed to make people act more cautious in character, in practice we see reckless actions constantly regardless. Not to mention the (less relevant but still problematic) part where people circumvent the normal ck apps by trying to get others in a situation where their characters alleged "lack of fear" causes them to be killed over what is in fact petty reasons ("Fear me!") It does not improve "realistic" behaviour by any means, it's a backdoor for ck apps. And should be removed as I stated very often.

Name: TheRealCarrySaunders Comment: Gotta love how he's asked to define "respect" and has no answer to this

I'll stand with you on this but the lobby of wannabe conspirators is strong here so expect resistance

Whispering near other people should be banned imho as it's a textbook definition of powergaming. Many use it due to the highlight, regardless (see above). Allowing this for (adressed) normal speech with /to would be a good improvement as it'd discourage the random whispers in big crowds.

Username: TheRealCarrySaunders Comment: This is a direct consequence of the local habit to blame 3rd party security agencies for incidents at your place opposed to take responsibility, and the subsequent trend to place metal detectors at club and restaurant doors as if it was courthouses. This is nothing else but an attempt to outsource responsibility. Fish smell from the head. Take responsibility for your guests opposed to blame them for partying, Los Santos

Name: TheRealCarrySaunders Comment: Haters gotta hate and if it's not the hair (or the lack therein) they'll find something else. Never! Also don't mistake hatred for vanity xoxo

It's a serious design issue that using radios is a more convenient solution in our game interface than a modern phone. Besides group calls, receiving incoming calls while on call is a MUST, we're not rping 70s landline phones here. Occupied, jesus, how anachronistic. And the caller does not even get a notice. Also fix commands so /call and /sms recognize groups and not just individual contacts.

Username: TheRealCarrySaunders Comment: If I host a party, it is my responsibility and mine alone who ends up on stage. In tactical terms we speak of "crowd control", something an event host should take in account. Or not host events. Specially not with tax money!

I'd further like to pick this up to point out a simple system won't work: While in game theory a ck has more "significance" and impact on the game world, practical experience does not support this point of view. Besides the mentioned (ck-)murders where corpses are not or only way later found -which naturally would not make the news irl, and if, then first start with a "missing person" story-, there's also a much higher amount of pks every day. These deaths, while not removing any character from the game as cks do, Can be just as impactful on the game world if the plot evolving around a death is what causes this impact, opposed to the personal level of an individual being deceased and those knowing them ic griefing or celebrating over it. A prime example here for instance that made the news ic recently is the G6-Sheriff-shooting- and I'll not spoiler too much when I disclose that in this particular case, Prosecutors immediately sensed this might be big and , consequently, right away also notified the big public news outlets of the case. This is basically the best we could do. It is important to note three things though: 1. The news scene as it is is small enough to coordinate on individual level in case (if I run into something where I feel more hands on deck than just ours would be good, I'll also tell the Insider and vice versa). 2. Unless a case is really really promising- say, G6-Sheriff-shooting as most recent example- we'll do the opposite however, and typically split resources: If The Insider already covered a case, I'll only pick it up if either I feel they left something out I learned about, or if as mentioned it's so big that irl every news station would talk about it. Under normal circumstances however, it is more efficient to cover as many cases as possible. 3. LEOs, as it stands, have no direct incentive to share information with the media (except for publicity). And truthfully, it is not their primary job to inform people what they do, their job is to enforce the law first of all. Here's where a Sunshine Act as mentioned would indeed be a major gamechanger- I'll let Desi Lydic explain why:

The general problem here is quantity. Every single person playing a reporter, regardless how low their standards ic might be, does a degree of research for their broadcasts, articles etc. The problem here is that putting a case in one of these (or other) categories does not do the trick to provide proper information that then can be used ic. Take ck's as prime example: An automatized script can not detect how much of a characters' demise will be known to investigators or the public (For all options we have at hand, it's just as much possible a corpse vanishes to never or only years later be found). Pretty much the same goes for business closings: A script can impossibly predict a certain business will drop out of service upfront, unless again that is manually monitored and fed info by the respective individual business holders. Much more often than a planned closure we see business dropping over other factors and without a clearly defined date- some give up due to a lack of staff, some due to a lack of success, again others as they find out they get bullied their corner and so on. thus, business closure or opening would be as tricky to maintain as it's already hard to define exact times of businesses dropping out of service (You only notice it's gone when it's gone for a while, happens irl too). This is the one exception as unlike in other cases such as deaths or businesses going up and down, there's two crucial things included in the process that enable reporters (or potentially a bot) to work with. First, an arrest will always have a known time and date (unlike a business that just ceases to open). Secondly, there's going to be documentation in every single case ("Police say..."). As the one single news station reported already ic, the legislature is actually preparing a Sunshine Act for LS, which will legally oblige to share this information with the public. For us (and the other news outlet which actually exists 😉 ) the problem will however still be the quantity: To report news several times throughout the day and investigate all available cases, both me as well as the Insider would need much, much more people willing to dedicate time to the mostly unglamorous task of digging into files and reports as well as to go out to investigate ic: After all, we're just as much expected to critically review police sources, where doubt and conflicting claims arise. tl;dr, the bot can write but it can't do a fact check or an investigation (or figure out a corpse is dumped in the harbour for no one to see and not buried in public ceremony, for that part).

Absolutely.

The real problem is not the portrayal of children, or that some of the kids portrayed are overly aggressive/ignorant/etc. , exaggerations and questionable portrayal happen just as much with adult characters. My main issue is how when portraying an adult, I'm forced to step down to this level and take the kids seriously as they are subject to exactly the same rules ultimately. I have to fear kids (lol) or it might cost my life, and what's worse, I have to make kids fear my adult char if I want a setting where my adult char is not generally afraid of kids (as that is the only way to keep them at bay given by the rules, being more feared). It might just be me but adults trying to make kids fear them is the real issue, and our rule sets -including again the detail most kids are effectively gangsters- constantly forces adults to do that, or risk to fall victim being constantly abused by kids. Which, well lol is a little ironic but not really making much sense.

One key difference is that the business settings (or crime factions, too) allow more room for trial and error. Stupidly said: 20 people can apply for a club, 10 get it from PM, 6-7 manage to open, 4 of these eventually manage to gather a regular clientel and establish themselves longer, 1-2 turn out good. Similar mechanics you have in the illegal faction scene where out of a very high number of factions starting, many do not live too long (without to go out in as much as a bang left alone a big one). Anyone can give it a shot, some will eventually prevail better. Looking at politics, we simply can not apply this pattern to filter out the most successfull mayor as we can't have 5 people trying it simultaneously (this would make absolutely no sense and compromise anyone's setting, regardless if they favour the own-state-lore or like Fantasy California, for that part).