unforum

[konamouse]

But rose, ETS is not IG. It's totally appropriate to share info about unfiction.

In the case of SentryOutpost, it is definitely IG and the established members there are presumed characters.

We're not legislating, we're making strong suggestion.

[Phaedra]

Re: [BAST] [META] In-game forums and UF

[thebruce]

Can I share?

I think, as far as UF is concerned, there is a TOS, and we need to enforce it, nicely of course, because the TOS is for the good of the community as a whole. The TOS is a ruleset based on guidelines for an inviting, friendly, entertaining community. While we can't enforce rules outside the bounds of UF, we can offer our suggestions for good etiquette out there.

Now when it comes to TINAG, I don't think the issue is 'whether uf exists out there', but rather if our actions force characters into that awkward position of recognizing an incident that becomes paradoxical for them. So as an example, between rose's "unfictionrose" name and a direction by someone towards a character to visit unfiction, I'd say the former is fine, because it's passive - the character isn't forced into recognizing anything; whereas the latter does exactly that.

So I think if we encourage people to follow good arg etiquette, I don't think it should be about hushing anything and everything oog, but rather simply not forcing ingame assets into a TINAG situation.
And even that isn't based on a ruleset, because it does ultimately fall on the PMs to decide how to react to anything they're presented with. The only rules are within UF.

So no one's obligated to say anything or nothing out there, but we can help remind people about why we encourage the guidelines we do - for the sake of the game and community, and for good reason. But in the end, the decisions are still the players', and the PMs'.

(and by 'outside', I mean any forum or website, whether ingame or oog, that isn't UF, since for the most part, it's always our TOS that is the subject of discussion )

[mapmaker]

My 0.02¢:

I personally go about it thinking, "How would this end up if I was conversing with the characters?" Sometimes we as a community approach an ARG in such a way as not to draw suspicion that we were a pre-defined community to the characters in it. LCP, for instance: we could plausibly all been attracted by the poker. It never really came up there, anyway.

Here it seems to have come up, in that we are approaching them as a group, a pre-defined community. (I mean, how else would we have been able to put the clues together from the packages?) Now, if one of these characters asks me what kind of community I'm a part of, if I say "oh, we play alternate reality games" and go on to describe them, that gets really awkward for the character. We don't want them going all Moriarty on us, right? So in my mind, just saying "oh, it's a gaming forum" is sufficient on both ends.

Anyway, this is probably not particularly pertinent to the discussion that was at hand, but I like rambling sometimes.

[poeticexplosion]

[djsampson]

I don't see it as a big problem. For a PM, they can easily right off our comments. They don't need to bring it back up. Posting that someone is from "UF" could mean alot of things. This posting shouldn't alter the storyline by any means. I do it mostly for new players looking for outside resorces.

I found UF from thebruce on Occular Effect. Although it was an OOG forum for the game. As a PM they have the ability to disregaurd any statements, PMs or Emails player send them.

This is not so much a discussion about putting characters is a bind, as much as it is players want to follow the game with out any real life distractions "TIAG" while they are in "TING" mode.

So, really this whole disscusion is all based on personal opinion. I don't mind being reminded that I am playing a game. But I hate (with a passion) players who roleplay IG and don't come out of that mode. As this thread has shown to each his own. We are a large group of people with different feelings on differing issues.

[aliendial]

Of course UF's TOS only apply here. There are no "rulez" for behavior elsewhere. But rose, are you suggesting that people go to in-game forums and start talking to characters about how we have a wiki about them and are analyzing and stalking them (because they're characters in a game) and wondering what they'll do next in the game? Because that's what we do at UF, and talking about UF just amplifies the paradox of having an active community that the characters have to ignore to maintain the four corners of their game universe. Fortunately the PMs can ignore anything they want, although it gets confusing for civilians to see people talking about things like UF in-game but seeing the characters totally ignoring it. That's why I advocate not talking up UF in-game. But that's merely my opinion.

[rose]

What I am suggesting is that we not tell people how to play a game.

Even if players did mention unfiction to characters, don't you think the PMs can deal with that? I'm sure that has happened. It has never been a problem before and I am not sure why this game is being singled out.

In ilovebees, dana posted about unfiction but so did many players. There were links to unfiction all over that blog - did that become a problem? No, not at all. I'm sure that there have been mentions of unfiction and links to the to these forums in many other games. There are links to unfiction in the meta-site of PPC. The characters don't post on that board, but it was pretty clearly an "in-game" site. No one ever complained about that.

So, this has never been an actual problem in any game we have ever had, including games where unforums has been mentioned by the PMs or the players.

As I don't think this issue has ever caused a problem in a game, I'm not sure why it was even brought up in the first place. I think that moderators need to understand that what they post as suggestions or opinions are taken seriously by the players. I think that is why unfiction generally has a "hands off" policy.

No one wants to worry that if they make a mistake it will be pointed out in a post on unfiction. I am particularly concerned about newer or inexperienced players, who are more likely to mention unfiction or these forums in a post.

So long story short: I don't think the mention of unfiction or unforums on in-game by players has ever been a problem or affected a game. I don't think it is the end of the world if unfiction is mistakenly mentioned to a character. I do think it is a much bigger problem if we as players start making rules telling people what they should post in any other forum.

As you can tell, I feel very strongly about this.

[carmenmiranda]

There's a difference between making rules for other people, and for pointing out in-game etiquette, which is what was done here. Etiquette is just that--it's an understanding of what is considered to be, for lack of a better word, "rude".

I think it was done here very politely, and was very much phrased in a non-ruley kind of way. Every post had a caveat of "my two cents" or something similar.

When I first started playing these games, there were lots of things I didn't know that aren't "rules" but are, like this, etiquette. For example, it is considered to be polite to read through the posts in a given thread before you post something, to see if it has already been mentioned. Nobody is going to "ban" you from a game if you post something that's not new. But often there will be a very politely-worded post letting you know that whatever you've seen has been noted already.

Or, if you're not a newbie, there will be some good-natured ribbing.

I also feel very strongly about this. Why? Because I think it's not only rude to the PMs, but it is rude to other players. The whole fun of ARGs, for me and for many others, is that we pretend that it's not a game. That philosophy has been around since the beginning. It's mentioned frequently in lots of different ways--sometimes as a gentle reminder, and sometimes shouted as a battle-cry.

Anything done during the course of the game that points out "THIS IS A GAME!" is like sitting in front of someone in a movie who is offering a constant commentary on how the special effects are done. Or someone telling you how the magician is doing the trick. One way or another, it just breaks the spell.

If you offer a running commentary during a movie, it's not going to change the outcome or the actions of the producers or characters. The special effects are not going to be done any differently. But the person sitting next to you is going to stop, just for that moment, being immersed in the plot, and instead be focusing on the mechanics and sleight-of-hand.

When I was new, I appreciated when people gently let me know about the etiquette of the game, because I wanted to contribute and not just be a constant source of annoyance for other people. And, really, I had to be told sometimes.

I, too, agree that people shouldn't be TOLD how to play the game. For example, in the last game I played, there was a character who was kidnapped. In real life, some people would leave this sort of thing in the hands of the authorities, while some others would be trying to track down the kidnappers themselves. People should and did feel free to react in both of these ways--to sit back and let in-game characters lead, or to reach out with pressing questions.

I think it's sad when players try too hard to tell others how to play. I think it's sad when someone who is really excited about a game posts specs and people jump on them because they think the specs are silly. There are times when one player will think that we should tell the in-game characters something, while others don't. And, ultimately, all the players need to accept that their opinion on the matter only goes so far. But that's different from pointing out etiquette.

So, to summarise, I don't think that anyone phrased anything as a "rule." I think an important piece of etiquette was pointed out--one that greatly affects the enjoyability of the game for other players. This, and all pieces of etiquette, should be pointed out kindly, so that it doesn't ruin the game experience for the person spoken to either. I think this was done.

That's my two cents. I'm just another player.

I'll let this drop now, because I don't want this to turn into some kind of game-ruining flame war.

[mapmaker]

The issue has come up before, although perhaps not in this manner, in Who Is Benjamin Stove. I do agree with what you're saying, Rose, about avoiding proclamations about how to play a game. I don't think anyone here is trying to be prescriptive, but on the other hand I could see how a freshly-minted ARGer might go "OMG {she, he} {has so many posts, is a mod} I must listen to {him, her}".

On the other hand, there is some value, I think, in letting new players at least know that something they say on a board will most likely be ignored by the characters, especially if the player is trying to communicate directly with them. But YMMV, obviously.

[Rogi Ocnorb]

Where's Ehsan when we need him

[Worker]

I first read Phaedra's first post in this thread, and though "okay, it's that time again where the etiquette is explained for the new people". And I agreed with her post.

Then I read rose's last post, and though "yeah, what really is the problem? The PMs can handle it. No harm."

Then I read this thread and this thread on the sentryoutpost forums, and my stomach churned. Now I agree with carmenmiranda's last post that keeping "this is not a game" enforced as much as possible increases the enjoyment for the "players".

[Phaedra]

[Worker]

[Phaedra]