Rule 8. Politics. Gone. For good.

I never actually go to any of the Rants threads besides the politics one and the SV one. The amount of political spillover (including SJW related stuff) into the SV doesn't really seem much higher these past few months compared to previously.

As for ranting about being banned in another forum because of your political views, that's not something I think of as actual discussion of politics. I've always seen that as, you know, ranting about that other forum.

 

Yeah, except the involvement is a (fictionalized) depiction of the actual, documented excesses of a real-world political group/movement. I could get into a similar situation with a story set in the '50s or '60s with the civil rights movement as a background... etc., etc. Politics is a part of real life, and it impacts on our lives. It's almost impossible to write a halfway realistic piece of fiction without them getting involved somehow.

As for asking on IRC, it's an open issue of policy on the forum. I'm of the opinion that this sort of discussion should be in... well, "public" is the best way to put it, I suppose -- open, anyway. It needs a public response... like the one tehelgee just provided, even if it's rather inadequate.

I suppose this does tell me where I'll be running that quest, though... even if its ideas post got considerable response here.

Edit: To clarify, tehelgee's explanation is sufficiently broad that I have to assume that the "no politics" rule would disallow, say, Worm (cf. Lustrum). I'm pretty sure that's not what he intends, but the rule's really quite poorly thought-out as written.

 

And there was much rejoicing.

 

Well, I guess the new threads didn't even last 2 days. Damn, that has to be some sorta record. Ah well, I'm going back to sleep. I just hope the SV rant thread and Sanctimonious acts of assholery on QQ rant thread don't get nuked again when I'm sleeping. Again.

I miss everything when I go to bed. >.>

 

While the Mods have the right to make this choice, I consider something so far reaching and broad, that effectively bans any sort of game that involved the real world in any scale over that of a small town as written, to be a mistake. While I agree that politically based flame wars should be stomped on, I do not think that game ideas such as 'You are all wizard lords of a wizard academy, have fun abusing your power while still carrying out your responsibilities enough you don't get fired', which is a game that I have actually considered running, to be banned. Because that would involve both facility politics and inter-fantasy nation politics, as rule as written both of those are banned, and while people can say 'oh the mods will not be mean about such things' depending on that while directly ignoring the rule as written does not seem like a good idea.

Or any of the 'Council of National Leader' games we have seen happen in the past, which are also banned by the rule as it is written. Hell, looking at my quests, I get deeply worried about the fantasy nation politics that I had planned to show up once players finally made it to the fantasy setting in MC Dynasty and raised a wizard's tower and basically became a power player locally, because rules as written I'm pretty sure making a peace treaty 'on screen' is against the rules, and that sort of thing shouldn't be. Or dealing with the multiple space nations in my space pirate quest... or, hell, as written, I'm pretty sure it makes it against the rules for Minster Fudge to show up in the Tri-Master Quest at all. Or basically anything else to do with the later half of Harry Potter because the political corruption of the Ministry is a more then minor thing in that half the series.

Look, I'm not saying that the idea behind this new rule is a bad one, but could we at least have a form of said rule that doesn't blanket ban depicting any large scale form of human interaction as per a direct reading of the text before any sort of 'common sense' interception?

Beyond that, the 'Common Sense' behind rule interception is a thing that changes over the years, not something that remains static. Even if, right now, or for the next year, there isn't a single person who would view a rousing game of "You are a magical hypnotist spy sent to go spy on an enemy nation and 'turn' any of its assets that you can" as against the rules, will that still be true one year and one month into the future, when some new mod is having a really bad day and no sense of humor? Even if that is something that we can appeal, it isn't something that we should ever have to appeal in the first place. And as written, it is something that we would have to end up appealing.

If the issue is people throwing political poo at each other, why not simply announce that Rule 1, the 'Be Polite To Each Other Or Else' Rule, and Rule 5, the 'Keep On Topic' rule are going to be enforced with a Rod of Iron on anything to do with modern politics? Anyone throwing political poo at each other and refusing to stop could still be banned under those rules as is.

 

It's only real life politics that are banned.

 

If you antagonize a Moderator the most likely thing that will happen is you get banned, that isn't exactly a darwin award thing.

 

Happerry pointed out on IRC that that's not in the rule as written. Of course, even if it was, it'd still be overbroad.

Fantastic racism is just a patch over racism, for instance, and Worm features multiple characters who directly reference real-life political issues. And what if I were to try and run a Stargate quest? Senator Kinsey's brand of jingoism is very much a real life political thing... just as an example.

 

While I fully support the rights of site owners to determine what happens on their platform, I can't help but be amused by this rule on account of all the kvetching about those bastards on SV, with their thought police and their lawyer roleplay.

 

I imagine if you look at the cross section between those people and the ones who start the politics junk you'd have a very fat overlap

 

You know the mods are actual people that you can ask for clarification on specific instances, right?
It's not like they're some enigmatic force that will strike you down from the great beyond with nary a warning.

 

This is probably a better implementation that what SB or SV will do, where it will be (is de facto already) a "do not talk politics we don't like"-rule.

 

That appears to be what Aleh is doing in this thread.

 

Then they should actually ask a mod. Tag them, rather than just post an open question and hope a mod happens to read that post and bother to answer.
I'm sure they'd get a faster response that way.

 

Already done. That lead to this:

As written and explained, the rule forbids fictionalized depictions of real-world politics, political groups, and political movements. That would forbid the X-Men (who were created as a blatant expy of racism and the civil rights movement), Pokegirls (loooots of commentary on feminism there, especially in the backstory)...

More accurately, I asked, and have been replying based on the answers.

You didn't notice the multiple posts doing exactly that?

 

Whoops, my bad.

 

Okay Aleh, after going through this thread again, I still don't understand where you're getting the "Fictional political analogies/commentary is banned" from. I only noticed the stuff saying debate itself was banned. Aside from something about yog shogoth?
If you could point me to the post saying political analogies in works of fiction are also banned, that would be great.
Edit: Or has the question not been answered yet?
Edit 2: Nevermind, I don't think it has. I'll just go to sleep now. I should have done so hours ago.

 

A mod already answered about the fictional politics. Even quoted your post Aleh

very bottom of page 2. >.>

 

This is... fairly unambiguous: It means that fictionalized depictions of real-world politics, politicians, political groups, and political movements are categorically forbidden now, as long as the original source is recognizable.

This is, to be blunt, ridiculous... and why I'm no longer seriously considering running that quest here.

I know. See above.

 

I personally think you are reading into that too much and searching for things that aren't even there. But I just got up and don't want to get in an argument about this.

So I'll bow out here.

But your next post should be tagging the mods and asking for clarification, seriously. If you're that worried about it, it's best to directly ask them yourself and then wait until they answer because most of them are not online right now.

 

Why not why not satire our political views through fantasy?

It will be vague but as long as it's a story, it should be within good faith of rule 8.

But I don't honestly don't want to keep it completely fantasy. I still want to one day write a worm Si-Potus Quest or story that is NSFW.

Maybe even a Legend of the galactic heroes fic.
Which is World War I in space.

 

I'm a raging pervert, and I approve.

 

In what context?

 

That political BS is not the point of this forum and should be done away with. If I want to argue politics in circles, there is Whitehall. I don't even mess with SV's political scene. It's way too stressful for me, mang.

I'm happy that QQ is putting its hoof down (brony!) on it.

I'm pretty sure that if you want to still do a story with political intrigue and all that fancy stuff, you'll be okay. But arguing over every little thing certain people in places of political power (and their supporters do) IRL is right out, such a thing would be off-topic in any story threads so that all is self-explanatory. So, no more arguing over DOOM! and shit like that? Cheers.

 

Oh, thank god. Politics (of a sort) is the bread and butter of a lot of Worm concepts, and I was worried this would affect those.

 

Is there a limit to how vague we can be or is this the only example?

 

See, that's what was nice about talking about it here. The political scene of places like SV is a complete clusterfuck. Here you could actually have casual conversation about it despite a wide variety of views being expressed.