Jump to content

An Accord.


Velvet

Recommended Posts

In response to a number of grievances aired by multiple parties, perpetuated over a period of months/years by the player of Catalyst/Dreamer/YT/Good Alice, etc., we the undersigned affirm the following:

1) That we shall not willingly interact with the characters of this player in either the 2009 or 2017 Aberrant OpNet Forums or Fictions.

2) That the characters of this player shall not be invited to participate in group fiction events involving the undersigned.

3) That the undersigned shall not interact with the aforementioned player's creations in any in-character chat which may take place.

4) That none of said player's characters, creations, events, or ideas will be permitted to affect the undersigned in the interest of preserving continuity and a cohesive game world.

5) That this accord will remain in effect until the undersigned, unanimously, agree that it is null and void and may be stricken from the records as obsolete.

6) That those in agreement with this accord need only reply to this post in the affirmative to render it active insofar as it concerns their characters and their interests/properties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am debating the premise of this.

You want to take a player, and ignore their canon. Okay, I can see that. I can see that with anyone.

What I can not see is taking half of the boards on one side, and half on the other. That will not work. I think more over what needs to be discussed is whether you want her gone or not. Personally, I have no issues with Dreamer, or the characters he portrays. But boycotting like some stupid teenage fad will just make things shittier. I move that we no longer just boycott, and instate a vote to rid the player, and not just ignore. Either total annihilation, or none. What I suggest is we go majority of people voting. Whomever wins, we go that way. If we chose to boot Dreamer, his characters are no longer valid in any canon form. If we chose to keep Dreamer, his things are still valid.

This is just an idea mind you, because I know this ignoring shit will lead to problems for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something else just occured to me, thanks to someone I am currently speaking of the issue with.

I think doing anything like this will just become something that is commonly done. Even if the vote thing doesn't happen, whats to stop people from just being all "Oh, Velvet did something that mildly annoyed three or four of us, so she isn't allowed to post on anything we do."?

Sorry Velvet, I just picked a name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, if I had my way, Dreamer would have long since been given the boot.

That said, I don't have my way, because this isn't my site. It's Chosen's, and it's up to Chosen as to whether someone should or should not be booted.

As such, the extent that I can do is to simply refuse any and all participation between my characters and those of Dreamer. That is the intent of this action, and that is what I've signed my name to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There about two reason this is a bad ideas. Neither of them hav eot with my feelings or really even me.

One. If someone is so unreasonable to call for this action...What makes you think they are reasonable enough to care about?

Two. If it is done once, what will stop it from happening again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if you have to go to such messaures because you cannot reason with someone.. Why would you think that you could make them care about you reading or not reading their posts? After all they clearly do not care what you do or think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lina: People are not banned from RPG-Post. Chosen runs this site, and to my knowledge, has never banned a single person. As players, our only recourse is to decide, individually or collectively, not to interact with someone. We do not have the power to remove someone, nor do I think that's necessary. Catalyst's player has as much right as the rest of us to author any fictions he desires here- the above statement is designed merely to indicate that not everyone is willing, at this point, to allow him to include or involve our characters or their properties or affect them in any way. It is, in effect, a moderate form of "shunning," and is not the result of merely the idle annoyance of two or three players. I accept that, as a newcomer to RPG-Post, you have not had the experiences with this particular player that many of us have, and we all have different playing styles. That may change, and may not, but some (many) of us have taken all that we can.

Catalyst: Whether or not you care if we read your fictions is, unfortunately, irrelevant for the purposes of this agreement. You will not be invited to participate in our individual fictions, in group fictions which include those who've agreed to this statement (and a few others who've not), or acknowledged in any in-character fashion at all by the players designated in this thread. Your reaction to these statements is your prerogative, and you may note that a clause has been included to allow for the nullification of the accord should the signees unanimously decide to reconsider your inclusion in our shared environment.

I find this highly reasonable, especially given the circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to be missing the point, Catalyst. This isn't about reasoning with you anymore. That's been attempted, repeatedly, by numerous people, and every one has failed. You've shown only that reasoning with you is impossible... Thus, those who've signed this accord no longer see fit to make the effort. The responsibility for your behavior is, as it's always been, on your shoulders alone.

No more reasoning, no more debating, no more arguing. You've squandered your chances, and this is the result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...