On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

[the sun fan]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

Oh people have given me examples before I'm good on that.

I'm asking for a definition so we can have a deeper conversation then our standard "be nice in a game about not being nice" discussions.

I don't think a fine definition exists, if there was one, I would've attempted to supply it in my first post.

No, but blaming me for being toxic (whatever that term means here) was more preferable to town then admiting their faults.

This whole thread sprang from those accusations and if this is going to just be a call out thread it'll be really cool if people dropped the pretense and just called me out like we're adults.

I want to be clear, and I really should've done this in the first post, this is not calling out you or anyone specifically. Almost all of us have been toxic before. Bolth listed me as non-toxic, but I'd say I really crossed some lines in the Animal Crossing game, to name a recent(ish) instance. Its probably got no exceptions that, if you've been playing the game for as long as most of us have, you've been toxic at least once.

I guess I should expand, time for shower thoughts (literally as I type this)

The act of name calling or challenging someone's logic isn't the issue. It's how players go about it at an extreme negative angle to purposely provoke a player.

For example...
"The hell are you talking about? I've explained why I believe (player) is (guilty/notguilty) if you look at my previous posts!?"

To...

"What the fuck are you talking about you fucking moron? I've explained why I believe (player) is (guilty/notguilty) multiple fucking times. Learn how to read dipshit or stop being bad at the game."

Both convey the same message, but its pretty clear which one is intended to provoke a player negatively.

I think this is as good of a definition as it will get; the difference between these two.

Ok cool but that description of toxicity can really only be answered by me making the same response I already have and we've already started a circle.

The only consistant throughline in everyone's definition is that post made them feel victimized and unless the accusation is that people are intentionally victimizing players in the game then that's something largely iut of ny control unless I just adopt a game strategy that involves no pushing and that's honestly half the game. Or more, since when people don't feel pressure they don't play the game instead

As currently described, you're not going to get toned down responses/pushes unless you start a list of banned words like idiot, dolt, fuckface, whatever but everyone doesn't want censorship and since the sin here really is, when you boil the complaints down, people taking it personal and not the words themselves censoring isn't gonna matter.

Like if Airhead is the worst insult I'm allowed to say and I call someone an airhead and they recognize that I used the worst insult that I could, they're still going to get their feelings hurt regardless of what word actually got used.

"Don't use insults", while at least being quantifiable and enforceable, isn't super practical in a game that gets heated by nature (you know with the fact that you're either lying to your friends or know for a fact that if the game is still happening, a friend is lying to you).

Last post on the issue. I've no more to say and frankly this community's repeated unwillingness to actually play the game (inactivity, unwillingness for town to do basic town things like reads, cross examine or vote apparently) make me not want to engage it. Blaming this last game going sideways on me for being angry at Bug is just the cherry on top of the sundae.

I'm not in favor of banning any specific words, aside from words that are already banned by FFR as a whole (and I don't really think there's a hard list of these anywhere).

I don't think anybody is saying that? I'm pretty sure people acknowledge that many town players fucked up hard in this game.

Make no mistake, that was one of the worst town performances I've seen on FFR, both to Lar and to agree with raeko. This thought can be expressed in a way other than "none of the towns gave a fuck and lost to the worst fucking fakeclaim I've ever seen, which really goes to show how stupid town was"
I won't spend 1,000 words (or more xd) talking about this game since its not the postgame thread, but its just a singular example.

I would say that Lar played the best out of town, but that's not an excuse to behave in such a manner, especially considering I think bug played nearly as well and is the last person town should "blame" for a loss. (finding people to blame is another subject entirely)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On this subject, I believe that this is a team game. You win as a team, and you lose as a team. Stats fall a bit short here in this department, and certainly its very hard to blame someone who had perfect reads on the first day phase, and died at the wolves hand on the very first night, but there is no such thing as a perfect game.

And most-most importantly, winning and losing just doesn't matter as much as I thought it did. I hope some other people are either here or get here. We can play this game 1,000 times under the same setup and find out as much as we can about the particular setup dynamics if we want, and we can even see who has the highest winrates, etc. It doesn't matter because we will never do this, and even if we did, its not really what we should be trying to get out of the game.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

On the subject of policing toxicity, its part of why I want another moderator (or maybe even two to bring it back to the size of 5 from the past). It shouldn't be just one person deciding whether or not something is toxic. I don't know what the punishments would be for being toxic, I don't know where the line would be drawn, but I think these are things that do need to be decided, probably after deciding on the new mod(s).

[Xiz]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

Also this past game was kinda one of the last straws for me. I love this game, I love the people, you all are some of the best people in the world who I respect and treasure as friends. But I really need a break from this game for at least a few months because it's to the point where I join and need to just skip any messages said by one or two players in order to not get annoyed at being verbaly abused. There is a line, and it's different for every player.

Some people can handle / want to play more aggressivly then others. Some people can't handle it. The people who play more aggresivly need to respect and understand the boundries of other players in the game, but at the same time I understand how that's not that easy for some players to do.

I'm very well aware that I'm probably the reason Halogen doesn't play TWG when he first joined back in 2015. After that I promised myself to never play like that again and play around people's line levels.

The Adam situation was so toxic, I brought him in but I cut him off completly. You cannot treat anothre human being like that ever.

[Xiz]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

Regardless, I would like another TWG sub forum moderator. I'm not sure how best to choose this person, and would like input on this matter as well.

Touching on this, I nominate either Charu, Funnygurl or Danceguy. They in my opinion are the most level-headed players, and most responsible out of everyone and know how/when to diffuse situations.

[Charu]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

As currently described, you're not going to get toned down responses/pushes unless you start a list of banned words like idiot, dolt, fuckface, whatever but everyone doesn't want censorship and since the sin here really is, when you boil the complaints down, people taking it personal and not the words themselves censoring isn't gonna matter.

Like if Airhead is the worst insult I'm allowed to say and I call someone an airhead and they recognize that I used the worst insult that I could, they're still going to get their feelings hurt regardless of what word actually got used.

"Don't use insults", while at least being quantifiable and enforceable, isn't super practical in a game that gets heated by nature (you know with the fact that you're either lying to your friends or know for a fact that if the game is still happening, a friend is lying to you).

Pretty much exactly why I don't want censorship, it restricts how players would want to go about a game of lying and logic. It is what it is.

...Also, I feel you on that "not playing the game" part. That's part of the inactivity problem that FFRTWG suffers from.

[mellonxcollie]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

Blaming this last game going sideways on me for being angry at Bug is just the cherry on top of the sundae.

I don't think anybody is saying that? I'm pretty sure people acknowledge that many town players fucked up hard in this game.

[Hakulyte]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

It feels more like an awareness issue than a real problem to me.
Everyone has their own perspective of how they want to play the game.
I feel like "toxic situations" can happen because one side doesn't understand the other or sometimes both sides are lost at same time.

Is there supposed to be more to this thread ?
Are you guys thinking at doing proactive actions ?

Something like making a survey about why people play, what they value and what would be preferable within reason in comparison to how things used to be/are/could be ?
I doubt everyone will magically change how they play. That being said, feedback can be important to give a sense of what to do next with what we have here.
I think if people get in the right mindset, games can be pretty cool overall.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

To be fair, I think you were a bit too strong on a new player... the arrogance might've just been a response to it to be honest, lol.

My view of toxicity in TWG (Or games like this) are what I described. Being an aggressive poster does not inherently make you a toxic player. However, just being aggressive has its issues as you know from me and others. Feelings get hurt and whatnot when you may not have intended to hurt feelings (keyword, MAY).

It's just inevitable with that playstyle, there's no changing it outside of forcing yourself to not be yourself.

You're certainly not like Adam boy like inDheart referenced, dohoho.

Ok cool but that description of toxicity can really only be answered by me making the same response I already have and we've already started a circle.

The only consistant throughline in everyone's definition is that post made them feel victimized and unless the accusation is that people are intentionally victimizing players in the game then that's something largely iut of ny control unless I just adopt a game strategy that involves no pushing and that's honestly half the game. Or more, since when people don't feel pressure they don't play the game instead

As currently described, you're not going to get toned down responses/pushes unless you start a list of banned words like idiot, dolt, fuckface, whatever but everyone doesn't want censorship and since the sin here really is, when you boil the complaints down, people taking it personal and not the words themselves censoring isn't gonna matter.

Like if Airhead is the worst insult I'm allowed to say and I call someone an airhead and they recognize that I used the worst insult that I could, they're still going to get their feelings hurt regardless of what word actually got used.

"Don't use insults", while at least being quantifiable and enforceable, isn't super practical in a game that gets heated by nature (you know with the fact that you're either lying to your friends or know for a fact that if the game is still happening, a friend is lying to you).

Last post on the issue. I've no more to say and frankly this community's repeated unwillingness to actually play the game (inactivity, unwillingness for town to do basic town things like reads, cross examine or vote apparently) make me not want to engage it. Blaming this last game going sideways on me for being angry at Bug is just the cherry on top of the sundae.

[mellonxcollie]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

Yeah it's probably more me losing my shit in deadchat and people not wanting ti be called out in post more then anything I feel.

Except who knows because no one's really defining quantifiable issues.

isn't deadchat where the dead go to rant though...?

I also thought you were too harsh on bugkid, I brought it up in the game while you were doing it. This might sound weird but I think there is a level of... closeness? that is needed if you are going to get so personal and insulting without it having that negative impact.

Bugkid is new to the forum and relatively new friend to everyone here except Xiz. Meanwhile most of us have played a thousand games and know exactly what each other are like. Bugkid doesn't know that. If you insult me I just shrug it off like "what a very Lar thing to do", but all Bugkid sees is someone being a jerk to them without any context of that person's play style. It's off putting

[dAnceguy117]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

hey Lar,

I haven't read anything, so feel free to take this with a grain of salt, but I think the fact that you're getting personal with someone who hasn't even posted in a thread named "On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)" - and whose pronouns you haven't made any note of - is worth reflecting on.

[Charu]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

To be fair, I think you were a bit too strong on a new player... the arrogance might've just been a response to it to be honest, lol.

My view of toxicity in TWG (Or games like this) are what I described. Being an aggressive poster does not inherently make you a toxic player. However, just being aggressive has its issues as you know from me and others. Feelings get hurt and whatnot when you may not have intended to hurt feelings (keyword, MAY).

It's just inevitable with that playstyle, there's no changing it outside of forcing yourself to not be yourself.

You're certainly not like Adam boy like inDheart referenced, dohoho.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

I actually got curious myself and decided to glance through the game.

...

Besides the other big problem (inactives), the emotional part I was describing was very much in the game that just ended.

The insults could be toned down, for sure. However, your bite-y posts were just that.

Bite-y.

Most of them were anyways. There were some insults here and there, but again, that goes back to the "heat of the moment" spiel. Biggest issue last game from what I glanced was honestly the inactivity more than the toxicity.

Yeah it's probably more me losing my shit in deadchat and people not wanting ti be called out in post more then anything I feel.

Except who knows because no one's really defining quantifiable issues.

I get examples like what you and and Bolth post seem like they're clear but since a lot of it is interpretation anyway (I use to make up insults if you recall, and people legit would get hung up on being called something like bathwater harder then just fucker) it just seems like a pointless circle of debate.

Also maybe this is me taking it too personal but if I'm more toxic again what even does that word mean anyway then any other player it's probably 95% because I actually have a decent post volume and everyone else is slanking. Bug's flip from unsure newbie to arrogance the moment he got cleared would be considered toxic to some people but since he spent the game largely not playing it until the last phase nobody is going to really care.

[Charu]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

No, but blaming me for being toxic (whatever that term means here) was more preferable to town then admiting their faults.

This whole thread sprang from those accusations and if this is going to just be a call out thread it'll be really cool if people dropped the pretense and just called me out like we're adults.

I actually got curious myself and decided to glance through the game.

...

Besides the other big problem (inactives), the emotional part I was describing was very much in the game that just ended.

The insults could be toned down, for sure. However, your bite-y posts were just that.

Bite-y.

Most of them were anyways. There were some insults here and there, but again, that goes back to the "heat of the moment" spiel. Biggest issue last game from what I glanced was honestly the inactivity more than the toxicity.

[MixMasterLar]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

Was the last game that toxic? I didn't watch the game, lmao

No, but blaming me for being toxic (whatever that term means here) was more preferable to town then admiting their faults.

This whole thread sprang from those accusations and if this is going to just be a call out thread it'll be really cool if people dropped the pretense and just called me out like we're adults.

[Charu]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

People call it getting a thicker skin, but I dunno about that anymore. That was my view as well in my heyday in this game.

There's having a tolerance for trash talk, and then there's knowing that trash talk is detrimental to everyone involved. Having views of both just make the situation more unbearable because you know it's going to happen since it's human nature to get frustrated at someone if you feel they're not doing something you consider to be "right".

[inDheart]

Re: On the subject of Toxicity/Community Check-in (TWG)

what about every time you want to use an insult you instead sub in a funny word like Gordon Ramsey

"you fucking donkey!" "you friggin donut!"

u miserable potato
knife sounds

you can create pressure without it needing to be needly on a personal level (see: other communities not having this problem or trying to shut that shit down when it comes up. like the dark lord potter community all hates each other now because certain people have problems never washing their laundry, etc.). when i play in places where the average age on the site tends to be much younger, they also (ime) tend to have a much lower tolerance threshold for shit, where it's like if i make a reasonably analyzed wall where i conclude that someone's lying, i could get a certain group of friends mad online that i pointed imo reasoned pressure in any direction. there's even a certain kind of player that's not bothered by adam but adam also bothers himself out of some places anyway

so tl;dr i think the question is "is our tolerance level among the regs for personal attacks & the like too high"

i didn't read the game so __________

ig there have been some highly publicized past flare-ups of particular people that felt like they were "dealt with" in that those people got hate and selected themselves away, but question 2 is "is that the proper way to deal with that? should the twg mods do a thing?"

also "do people even bring shit up to the twg mods or do we feel like it's tattling?"

anyway, rolls away