Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'forwarded'.
Found 12 results
-
Most of you have noticed that the speed of facebrowser is finally stable even during it's peak moments, I've seen an all-time high today while the site was still holding pretty well. There's more exciting stuff to come with the upcoming version but I believe the next topic of discussion should be regarding facebrowser's rules. I'm going to be voicing my own opinion here to engage in a discussion regarding the rules, nothing I say has anything to do with the development team. Facebrowser is a completely IC platform but the moderation is OOC, I understand why however this doesn't justify the lack of IC rules, there are no IC rules at all, everyone can post whatever they feel like without any consequences moderation wise, I suggest there should be some kind of list of what is not allowed to be posted on facebrowser and what is but will get marked as NSFW (blurred). Examples: > Pictures of dead bodies = post deleted > Pictures of injured people = NSFW > Video's of people fighting = NSFW > Pictures of people holding up illegal firearms = NSFW > Posts regarding the sale of firearms / drugs = post deleted > Account should also be able to be terminated if its purely to try and sell your illegal items > Nudity = post deleted > Sexualized pictures = NSFW > Sexualized pictures posted under 'friends' should not be marked NSFW, is it your own choice to add this person as your friend and see their content > 'Sexualized' pictures is a pretty vague, what is considered sexualized and what is not? Moderators on facebrowser seem to be very inconsistent with what should be allowed and what should be blurred, this is because the OOC rules state that it's up to the discretion of the mod, a sensitive mod will blur more easily. > Posts that harass a user should be allowed and dealt with IC (i.e. accounts who share pictures of someone to make fun of them) > Posts that call for violence should be deleted. There's this trend going on where firearms and drugs are being mass reported however not deleted/blurred since that content is allowed. Sexualized posts are also actively being reported and most are blurred even if (in my opinion) it does not warrant to be blurred, this will cause the blurred user to get upset and starts being petty, reporting other people and even posts from months ago just because their picture that showed some skin got blurred. I was told that LEO's and GOV are completely in love with how facebrowser is right now and that they actively work on posts that are clearly illegal. Does this actually actively happen or is it something that is a possibility but nobody bothers doing? I personally have not seen court causes that request user data from facebrowser (although I do not actively pay attention to that) To my understand the blurring and removing of more sexualized posts (posts that show more skin than usual but is not nude) happens because minors are allowed to utilize the website, this is completely fine in my opinion but there needs to be a standard on what is unacceptable to show a +- 16 year old and what is, they're on the internet and just a google search away from the real thing. Guns, drugs and violence seem to be acceptable to show to minors though since it is not blocked. What do you think about the current facebrowser rules and what should be adjusted? Or do you think everything is fine the way it is right now and that nothing needs to be changed? https://forum.gta.world/en/topic/36660-facebrowser-rules/
-
Most of the topic doesn't make any sense. Not sure how they got approved/added! These should either be fixed, or deleted entirely.
-
As it stands now, if you are namechanging a character for whatever reason, you need to wait a whole month, four weeks regardless of your activity on said character. I proposing this is lessened to two weeks for factions and unofficial factions. Having to wait a whole month, even if someone is RPing hours and hours a day on their character is just not realistic or helpful. Not having access to schemes severely limits your characters options during that time, making it much easier for the roleplay to become stale and in the worst case scenario, kill the faction. Some factions require the more detailed and less script orientated crimes to function realistically. -
The current rule states that you can only ram someone with your vehicle if your life is at risk, I think this rule is highly unfair towards certain situations where a player doesn't have a firearm. I believe it should be amended so that if someone you DIRECTLY know has their life at risk and you're there without a firearm, you can do this to save their life. I've been in too many situations / seen too many situations where a friend, fellow deputy, gang member etc is being actively shot at and I can't do anything to assist them because I don't have a firearm. Realistically if someone is shooting at your brother, sister, cousin, very close friend, are you just going to drive off and leave them to die? I believe the rule should be amended to state that if someone's life is at risk and you have relations to that person you can defend them with your vehicle. Obviously not excessively but at means to aid them in getting away from the situation. A character may only run over (ram) another player over if a character's life is at risk. This should not be done excessively
-
So to start off currently crime zones include hospitals but it specifically States medical centers are not included as crime zones to clarify what the rule currently States on what is classified as a no crime zone. The suggestion is quite simple, the exemption itself is a contradiction since hospitals are considered a no crime zone but medical centers are not but medical centers are in fact hospitals and the other side note of this is under this rule technically speaking this would make pill box Hill medical center exempt from the no crime zone rules due to the fact that along with the name pill box Hill does fit the definition of a medical center thus exempting it from the no crime zone rules. This somewhat is problematic because it does kind of create a gray zone on whether it is a no crime zone or not because the crime zone map says it is but the rules state it's not. To sum it up that exemption should either be dropped entirely or changed to small time clinics or hospitals that do not accept patients from ems due to the fact that the rule contradicts itself by saying hospitals are a no crime zone but medical centers are not when a medical center is a hospital (a large one) making it a gray zone ruling. -
The title says it all. When responding to or even making a complaint, you should be required to post the video in the complaint so that the other person can defend their actions and explain what happens in said videos/screens. This is only for players who are not admins/testers. Faction chats & script features are not confidential and videos should not be private because they contain a faction chat. There is a pattern that can easily be observed where people, mainly LEO roleplayers are allowed to accuse other players of breaking rules but are then allowed to PM the handling admin evidence instead of posting it in the complaint. All parties in the complaint should be required to review all elements of a complaint so long as it does not contain staff material. -
*Please note this is a screening question suggestion rather than a rule suggestion!* Hello staff team! I apologize if this isn't the best category to post this suggestion, but it seemed like a good fit. One of the most common phrases a good RPer knows is "your character is not you." This sentiment of IC and OOC separation is important to maintaining a healthy roleplaying community. Sometimes self inspiration and bleed happens, but complete self inserts, or egregious violations of IC and OOC boundaries can be concerning. Self insertion into roleplay may present multiple concerns, including: Blurring the lines (for everyone) between what is in character versus out of character (fantasy vs reality) Over protection/attachment with a character May increase the desire to make a "mary sue" type character It can make things much too personal for the person OOC Can make losing more difficult, leading to rule breaking May spark emotional OOC interaction for IC situations I'm sure the team is busy, so I don't necessarily think this it needs to be hunted to the ends of the Earth, but maybe we can help mitigate this behavior with a screening question for new players? I think this will help out weed out individuals that do not respect IC and OOC boundaries. The intent for me presenting this is to make sure that we recruit high quality RPers while also proactively reducing staff workload. Here is the screening question I propose: If the team likes this question and feels that it necessitates the need for a rule to go along with it, I would be happy to write something up outlining this topic. I'm just not sure if all your screening questions have to be 1:1 with what is written the rules. Thank you in advance for your consideration 😀
-
Currently the rule does not clearly specify whether you can scam for a duplicate of a key of the vehicle without getting the ownership of this, or only refers to the ownership of it. Although my guess of the rule is that you can steal a vehicle, not for the ownership, but for having it running for you, as whether you use a lockpick, or a /vdup scam, shouldn't change a lot. This gives confusion not only to members, also to staff members (I have been warned before for vehicle scams, for asking for a /vdup). So my suggestion is, whether it is not clearly specified, or whether it is the actual rule, to change and add that you can't scam only for the ownership of the vehicle as an asset, because it doesn't make a lot sense right now. If I ask a player to let me try their vehicle and they decide to give me the key, I shouldn't be forced by an OOC rule to return the car since I'm not taking the whole asset.
-
I caught some charges on a character, and fines came with it. I then namechanged back, and attempted to get the said fines removed, but I was told that I have to pay them. This demonstrates play to win mentality, and it is not fair on the player as the action was done on another character, so I should not have to pay for it after the namechange. -
So currently the rules only injuries and death for up to one hour. However, I think it should include jail too. There was a situation a few weeks ago where a character walked into the Blue Lion, punched my character for being rude to her, got arrested for assault, then paid bail and returned to the scene within 10 minutes. The rules is in reference to immersion, so realistically someone who was just arrested shouldn't be coming back so soon.
-
This rule would prevent pawn shop owners from selling under the table, thereby circumventing the script. This prevents artificial pricing made by hording items via buying them up en mass from other pawn shops. There's no RP involved and is purely driven by an OOC play 2 win mentality. -
So, there's a rule saying you can't fight without 3 CA's on, everyone agrees with this, but then I get told you can't even do fights/stabbing in cells without 3 CA's on. This is a ridiculous rule, mainly because SD are horribly inactive, but also because it just ruins RP in general. Let's say there's someone basically asking to be killed, call you a "taco", "faggot", "bitch", "fuck your dead homies", now what.. you have to wait a week for the one time there's ever 3 guards on. And by the time it happens they've left already. Now yeah, you can /report them but wow, how immersive. This rule needs to be changed for official jails factions, you should be allowed to kill people or beat them up in a cell regardless if there's guards or not, just make it mandatory that you do /jevent. Literally, literally if this rule is enforced then you've killed jail RP.
.png.13c32787f45986833551cc55c9cb43e9(2).png.23c99263f08b88be93f28ef60757568d.png.2bd003d877485d309a68724678bdd323.thumb.png.9d8c94f1220816ae5e29174bb89d2b71.png)
