Boundaries between real life and game in P&W

[Wayne]

I have a car for sale, can I advertise it in game?  I'll paint PnW on the bonnet...

[Buorhann]

I have a car for sale, can I advertise it in game?  I'll paint PnW on the bonnet...

 

Do it.

[ArcKnox]

I can't decide who is the more mentally challenged; the people who can't understand the joke, or the hypothetical ad company that would waste money on PnW player ads.

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

I understand that, and I stated in the OP that this was intended as a discussion not a report, and whilst I'm happy Sheepy has weighed in on the debate that's what it is. In the past Sheepy has responded to community discussions, and I think it's healthy for us as a community to discuss what boundaries we would like to see in the game. I am aware that Sheepy as the game owner is the one who decides policy but this is something which has been exercised in a flexible manner in this particular case and I thought it would be helpful to extrapolate the possibilities when it comes to extra-game advertising (both using ads and the alliance/player name and messages) to prevent future problems arising.

 

In other words, you can respond to any discussion about the game by saying "Sheepy decides", but if we did that we'd have no discussions about the game and it's future direction. So it's a non-comment really.

Its not a non comment, and for someone that wants a discussion you shouldn't be so dismissive of people making comments.

 

My point is this, these kinds of rules are up to sheeps to decide, not the player base.  You want to debate game mechanics, go for it, but letting players set what can and cannot be said is not the kind of power the player base should ever have, especially since this forum isn't representative of the entire player base, its just the loud minority.

[Wayne]

My point is this, these kinds of rules are up to sheeps to decide, not the player base.  You want to debate game mechanics, go for it, but letting players set what can and cannot be said is not the kind of power the player base should ever have, especially since this forum isn't representative of the entire player base, its just the loud minority.

 

Spite is not arguing that the player base should decide.  All he is asking for is discussion on what is acceptable and not acceptable when it comes to external advertising.  Sheepy will indeed decide what the 'rules' are, but the player base actually discussing each aspect of the game will give Sheepy a better understanding of the community and be better informed when making policy.  It's not the game mechanics that lure people back to this game, it's the community and our actions are a perfectly good discussion point.

[Spite]

Ronny, what you're essentially saying is "debate is pointless". Since your comments add nothing to the debate, I questioned why you made the effort to actually post.

[johnl023]

I could honestly never tell whether Trump 2016 (the alliance) was a troll alliance or not.

[Aksel]

Nope.

 

This is a game where people role play. Whether the role play borders real life entities or people shouldn't matter unless it is directly causing harm to a person or group...real harm though, not the butt hurt type most of you show symptoms of. If there is an alliance called Islamic State, let it be. Actually research "Islamic State" and find out what it truly means to run an Islamic state or republic. Disregard the major headlines of Islamic State and Caliphate and read the true meanings and understand that just because one group of ass holes want to terrorize, doesn't mean the whole religion of Islam and the following want to do the same. Use your head.

 

The same can be applied to every alliance, nation, leader name that represents and RL entity. Trump ads? I am honestly in disbelief that they will be banned. If an ad on a online browser game is forcing you to sway your vote or take attention away from your personal views and political beliefs, then maybe your beliefs aren't strong enough. Grow up, its role play - this isn't hurting you. You just don't like it and feel entitled to complain.

 

That is the life we live in now. If you don't like something, complain, complain, and work your best to remove it completely. Instead of growing up and living with it.

 

Yes - If an alliance called Islamic State comes in and starts preaching terrorist rhetoric - ban, delete, warn, etc.

Yes - If a player starts giving OOC attacks at another player based off their OOC RL beliefs, warn, etc. 

NO - If a player role plays a presidential candidate or any other RL entity without direct harm to people of the game - leave them be.

[Doktor Avalanche]

I worship Khorne and I am a slave to Chaos-  here to spread Chaos.

[Woot]

I think if there was a Coke alliance or an Eve alliance or a Boston Red Sox alliance, I'm pretty sure nobody would care, honestly.

 

Why does there need to be a sacred divide between P&W roleplay and real life? You pulled that out nowhere and it's ludicrous.

 

I think you're just specifically butthurt about the Donald Trump ads for political reasons, and you're trying to frame this a general problem to mask that.

 

Everybody goes insane whenever real life politics are brought up. They turn rabid and and want to crush the opposition at all costs. And it's tempting to just ban IRL politics to dodge the issue and make everybody shut up. But isn't this game a nation simulator called Politics and War? Isn't there a sidebar link directly to a political policy quiz where you can tell the game your position on immigrants and guns? Aren't these things a little bit too relevant to ban them? No real life politics in the politics game seems like a crazy rule to me. Are we going to ban all nations based on real entities next, because we're offended by that guy who plays ISIS?

[Betulius]

#MarcusAurelius2016

[Spite]

To use an example quoted here - I've defended the right to have an Islamic State alliance for the reasons discussed above. However if it had links on the page to the actual Islamic state and ran ads calling for RL global jihad it's a different thing. That's the line.

[Princess Bubblegum]

Here's a simpler question: are you allowed to post links to outside websites on an alliance page or nation page that are entirely non-game related at all? 

 

Why can't everyone/anyone put links to Trump's website on their nation page? Are you going to punish everyone who does something like that?

Edited December 18, 2015 by Princess Bubblegum

[Prefontaine]

 

#IStandWithPBG

[Spite]

Here's a simpler question: are you allowed to post links to outside websites on an alliance page or nation page that are entirely non-game related at all?

 

Why can't everyone/anyone put links to Trump's website on their nation page? Are you going to punish everyone who does something like that?

That's an interesting question and central I think to the debate. The question is whether or not external advertising is allowed. In most games it is not - links to pages which don't relate directly to the game are frequently banned as external advertising. When it is a product, campaign etc this is usually especially strict.

[Princess Bubblegum]

That's an interesting question and central I think to the debate. The question is whether or not external advertising is allowed. In most games it is not - links to pages which don't relate directly to the game are frequently banned as external advertising. When it is a product, campaign etc this is usually especially strict.

 

And how about youtube videos.. You can just as easily advertise with those. People put youtube links in their nation description all the time. Now you can even choose your own anthem. Maybe I can put up a Trump speech? Whadya think?

 

Edit: My new anthem:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=561CdWwpTeM

 

And before you think this proves your point, consider this: I can make an alliance (or even a nation/user name), duplicate everything about my alliance with the exception of it being dedicated to Taylor Swift, then advertise her latest songs and albums the same way. The point is you will never escape what you are arguing is "advertising" without removing all of these amenities--and there goes a huge chunk of what supports the game. You'll also likely begin to enforce hard crack-downs on what is put in nation descriptions. And you'll have to start policing usernames and nation names as well. And forum avatars. Hey good luck getting any new game additions coded anytime soon with all the moderating you'll be doing, sheepy.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Princess Bubblegum

[Spite]

And how about youtube videos.. You can just as easily advertise with those. People put youtube links in their nation description all the time. Now you can even choose your own anthem. Maybe I can put up a Trump speech? Whadya think?

 

Edit: My new anthem:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=561CdWwpTeM

What you're discussing is loopholes. As you suggest, you could post YouTube links or links to any other commercial website. The question is whether or not those links are appropriate or not and that's the question I am asking. I would suggest that whilst linking to an Eminem video might not be P&W related, it isn't advertising (merely poor taste). On the other hand linking to an advertisement or a video of a current RL political candidate has no bearing on the game and also constitutes external advertising, so it does cross a boundary.

 

Determining where that boundary sits however is the raison d'etre for this thread.

[Princess Bubblegum]

What you're discussing is loopholes. As you suggest, you could post YouTube links or links to any other commercial website. The question is whether or not those links are appropriate or not and that's the question I am asking. I would suggest that whilst linking to an Eminem video might not be P&W related, it isn't advertising (merely poor taste). On the other hand linking to an advertisement or a video of a current RL political candidate has no bearing on the game and also constitutes external advertising, so it does cross a boundary.

 

Determining where that boundary sits however is the raison d'etre for this thread.

 

Trumps words are music to my ears... I can't see why you don't see that.

 

 

Edit: if you missed the point, all I need to do is take a video of Trump and make it "musical enough," which itself is subjective (how loud does the aesthetic melody need to be relative to verbal words to pass your standards).

 

 

 

Determining where that boundary sits however is the raison d'etre for this thread. 

And that boundary will always have more and more loopholes which I'd be happy to use just to prove the point. It's a fruitless and time wasting endeavour.

 

And here's another one:

 

 

What a lovely song.

 

Here's what I'm getting it at:

 

Edited December 18, 2015 by Princess Bubblegum

[Avruch]

My issue about this; where were the folks complaining about this when PBG first started?

 

PBG has been doing Trump ads since back before the whole Rose/Mensa ad war.  That's several months ago and now it's a problem?

 

I get the point the OP is stating ( What is the line between advertising real life compared to in-game ), but this is way late beyond when the point would've been better considered.

 

People have been complaining about it periodically all along. As people get saturated and irritated with election crap, I'm sure the Trump ads have tweaked more and more nerves. 

 

Bubblegum has dedicated him or herself to being the most annoying people in PNW. I guess we just complain to Sheepy that Bubblegum is annoying until it reaches critical mass for Sheepy and he blocks the behavior. 

Edited December 18, 2015 by Avruch

[Princess Bubblegum]

[Princess Bubblegum]

People have been complaining about it periodically all along. As people get saturated and irritated with election crap, I'm sure the Trump ads have tweaked more and more nerves. 

 

Bubblegum has dedicated him or herself to being the most annoying people in PNW. I guess we just complain to Sheepy that Bubblegum is annoying until it reaches critical mass for Sheepy and he blocks the behavior. 

 

No, people just can't grasp--or more likely don't want to grasp--that the only way this is going to work is for the admin team to be subjective and hypocritical. There is no objective standard here beyond either allowing everything that is game-related (even if it has the appearance of advertising non-game related stuff as well)... or nothing. There is also no subjective decision that won't have a "loophole" to point out the inconsistency of that decision.

[Avruch]

No, people just can't grasp--or more likely don't want to grasp--that the only way this is going to work is for the admin team to be subjective and hypocritical. There is no objective standard here beyond either allowing everything that is game-related (even if it has the appearance of advertising non-game related stuff as well)... or nothing. There is also no subjective decision that won't have a "loophole" to point out the inconsistency of that decision.

 

What's your point? So Sheepy says he'll block things that are annoying, disruptive or otherwise objectionable to either himself or large numbers of people. Ok, its subjective. So what? This isn't a court of law or a debating society. 

[Princess Bubblegum]

What's your point? So Sheepy says he'll block things that are annoying, disruptive or otherwise objectionable to either himself or large numbers of people. Ok, its subjective. So what? This isn't a court of law or a debating society. 

 

My point? I wasn't the one who made a thread asking the community to establish a set of standards or ask where boundaries are crossed. If you want to leave it to sheepy's subjective opinion, fine--he's going to do that anyway. It's his game. What you are establishing is a democratic mob rule, though, when you say just get enough people to complain about a person and Sheepy can wield subjective standards to punish them. That's a horrible way to run a game--or anything.

Edited December 18, 2015 by Princess Bubblegum

[Spite]

What avruch said - the point is that the line isn't hard and fast and that judgement has to be used. I didn't say that music made a YouTube video ok, I said that advertising a RL company or brand made it not-ok. And this is only in context. A coca cola alliance with one member who advertised coca cola and posted coca cola videos is clearly stepping over the line. An otherwise normal alliance posting a picture or video that has products in it is probably not doing so for advertising purposes. Making that judgement is what human admins exist for. This thread is just to debate those lines.

 

As a general rule, I'd just ban everything you did simply because you've already admitted several times that you're trying to exploit loopholes in the mod rules, and that in itself is indication enough that you're deliberately crossing the line.

[Princess Bubblegum]

What avruch said - the point is that the line isn't hard and fast and that judgement has to be used. I didn't say that music made a YouTube video ok, I said that advertising a RL company or brand made it not-ok. And this is only in context. A coca cola alliance with one member who advertised coca cola and posted coca cola videos is clearly stepping over the line. An otherwise normal alliance posting a picture or video that has products in it is probably not doing so for advertising purposes. Making that judgement is what human admins exist for. This thread is just to debate those lines.

 

As a general rule, I'd just ban everything you did simply because you've already admitted several times that you're trying to exploit loopholes in the mod rules, and that in itself is indication enough that you're deliberately crossing the line.

 

Hogwash. I'm doing it in this thread as demonstration of the flaws of your horrible "standards". If you're going to use terms like "crossing a line," you're saying there's a standard because I can just ask you to tell me where that line is. What you're telling me now is that the standard is in the intent--again essentially indeterminable beyond the whim of the admin team and indistinguishable from role play.