Sociopath Community

Some reputation system would be good on Sc but nothing complicated. Basically if you fuck up you get strikes or something. After a certain point  the system fucks with you. 

e.g you can't have an avi - the community picks one you have to keep

MissCommunication said: 

e.g you can't have an avi - the community picks one you have to keep

We can actually do that sort of thing now. 

I tested it on a puppet that wouldn't stop putting up a Scarlett dox photo as it's avatar and otherwise already plan to have fun with photoshop when the opportunities arise for avatar replacement potential. 

We should make this canon, put it to vote and present it to TFI. Who will have the honours? MissC? TC? MissT? CC? 

This is one idea I have been thinking of. I'll make a thread to propose some ideas I have for rules and how we could enforce them for people to discuss. 

For me it's basically like this... why does the community just get trolled and not build a system that trolls the trolls back? Why would we be passive. Anyone who messes with usability moves along a spectrum of punishment and it can be entertaining for the users. 

And this is something we the people should decide - not mods. 

MissCommunication said: 

For me it's basically like this... why does the community just get trolled and not build a system that trolls the trolls back?

Because they'll just make new accounts. 

Exhibit A: When Luna kept changing TK's username during SC1. 

Still worth it though imo. The "Null's Cumslut" drama was pretty lolsy. 

I'll make a thread to propose some ideas I have for rules

And this is something we the people should decide - not mods. 

Do you have something against Inq and Meta now? 

I think this could be done with discussions instead of specifically enforcing additional rules (still worth making the topic). Spam's already seen as against the rules, and how to handle it can be more freeform when it comes to small things like avatars. 

To address the puppeteering issue TC, I do imagine that banning encourages the making of puppets more than this proposed internal sanction system would. It's a step in the right direction anyway. Like issuing prison sentences instead of death penalties. 

Xadem said: 

To address the puppeteering issue TC, I do imagine that banning encourages the making of puppets more than this proposed internal sanction system would.

Any retaliation from "The System" inspires it, but if it's funny it can be not only demotivating for them, but thrice as motivating for the userbase. Making new accounts requires Captcha every time (much more efficient than requiring it for every post) and the mod tools have been wonderful. Every little thing that mounts onto the milling frustration of their effort without getting in the way of the website or justifying blacklist practices are things I tend to like. 

It's good to keep pranking within praxis instead of justifying that "rule of funny" is allowed like many a past Discord drama has justified, though. 

It's a step in the right direction anyway. Like issuing prison sentences instead of death penalties. 

I'm not against it, I've even already tried avatar substitutions and it's proven to be clean and harmless. 

Turncoat said: 

MissCommunication said: 

For me it's basically like this... why does the community just get trolled and not build a system that trolls the trolls back?

Because they'll just make new accounts. 

Exhibit A: When Luna kept changing TK's username during SC1. 

Still worth it though imo. The "Null's Cumslut" drama was pretty lolsy. 

I'll make a thread to propose some ideas I have for rules

And this is something we the people should decide - not mods. 

Do you have something against Inq and Meta now? 

I think this could be done with discussions instead of specifically enforcing additional rules (still worth making the topic). Spam's already seen as against the rules, and how to handle it can be more freeform when it comes to small things like avatars. 

 It's about building a continuum of consequences so users aren't just banned and receive warning and it's fun. 

And don't take things personally lol. It's not about having anything against mods. It's about letting the community decide and have a voice in what they want.

MissCommunication said: 

Turncoat said: 

MissCommunication said: 

For me it's basically like this... why does the community just get trolled and not build a system that trolls the trolls back?

Because they'll just make new accounts. 

Exhibit A: When Luna kept changing TK's username during SC1. 

Still worth it though imo. The "Null's Cumslut" drama was pretty lolsy. 

I'll make a thread to propose some ideas I have for rules

And this is something we the people should decide - not mods. 

Do you have something against Inq and Meta now? 

I think this could be done with discussions instead of specifically enforcing additional rules (still worth making the topic). Spam's already seen as against the rules, and how to handle it can be more freeform when it comes to small things like avatars. 

It's about building a spectrum of consequences so users aren't just banned and receive warning and it's fun. 

Does it need to be as permanent as rules though, instead of just being fun tools of the trade to enforce rules that already exist? 

A topic for prank tools sounds awesome, but "rules" is a very enforce-y word. It's a word worth saving for bigger things imo. 

And don't take things personally lol. It's not about having anything against mods. It's about letting the community decide and have a voice in what they want.

You act like that isn't what all three of us have been trying to do. 

fair enough - rules can seem to strict plus we can't define them. 

general guidelines-ish, plus if we get them wrong it won't be as big of a deal as a ban.