Staff and BirdBodhisattva- Upheld - ATCT

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sucal said:
My issue has nothing to do with degenerate erotica and everything to do with putting cartoon ponies through the full horror/cultists simulator treatment. People can have whatever fetish they want, it being pony based isn't something I'd judge.

It's more wondering why someone would do that to the cast of MLP in the first place. What makes people want to see cartoon ponies go through that
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't know. Why do people want to see Rational Naruto absorb "The Nine Brained Fox" to get more Rational ... presumably proportioned like Megamind afterwards?

There's a lot of shit on this website that is just completely bewildering to me and immensely popular.

I try to judge it by its own standards instead of mine.
 
MC_Lovecraft said:
Do people really leave a thread, return to it later, and not catch up on all the posts that have occurred in that time, before commenting? I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around that. I typically go back and read at least the last ten pages of discussion before I join an in-progress thread to make sure I'm not retreading old ground, and I had assumed this was fairly standard practice. For a thread that I was already active in before, I don't understand how you would arrive at the position of being interested enough to rejoin the thread, but not interested enough to catch up on the conversation first. That seems like madness to me, and probably the cause of a huge number of misunderstandings on this site.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The thread has over 2000 pages.
 
MC_Lovecraft said:
Do people really leave a thread, return to it later, and not catch up on all the posts that have occurred in that time, before commenting? I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around that. I typically go back and read at least the last ten pages of discussion before I join an in-progress thread to make sure I'm not retreading old ground, and I had assumed this was fairly standard practice. For a thread that I was already active in before, I don't understand how you would arrive at the position of being interested enough to rejoin the thread, but not interested enough to catch up on the conversation first. That seems like madness to me, and probably the cause of a huge number of misunderstandings on this site.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean if tried that during my hiatus from Divided Loyalties I would have never caught up. I had to go main posts only. It's one of the biggest quests on SV. There were definitely times I had to skim in To Boldly Go and I stuck with that one after a time mainly because I didn't have to skim often. Trying to keep up with the entire conversation of a major quest thread is madness.
 
Now, I've only read up to page 10 of this thread and I just wanted to give some perspective as a voter. At the time of discussion, it was ,in hindsight, horrifying easy to change the focus of attention from "It's Rape, we can't do this" to "But think about the long term, in game effects of the other actions!"
I don't think I'm old enough or experienced enough to give a proper reasoning for anyone's actions. But I just want to make it known that at the time of voting, it was really, horrifying easy to unintentionally to start walking away from moral arguments to reasoning that "We should take this, because these other in game results are too bad for us!"

*I'd just like to make it very clear that I do not, in any way support rape. I can't remember what I voted for in the end, but I know that I probably got too carried away following the thread at the time and would like to apologise for my actions if I voted to support it. I got unacceptably carried away by pro-con debate at the time and I'm sorry.
 
I'm not sure whether this is a valid or good line of reasoning, but iirc I was thinking that everyone knows it's rape, and ramming that fact down in every other post is not a valid form of discussion (that, and I wanted to explore the consequences fully and in good faith so we could vote as informed as possible, so I engaged with the then-presented lines of arguments)
 
Night said:
I mean if tried that during my hiatus from Divided Loyalties I would have never caught up. I had to go main posts only. It's one of the biggest quests on SV. There were definitely times I had to skim in To Boldly Go and I stuck with that one after a time mainly because I didn't have to skim often. Trying to keep up with the entire conversation of a major quest thread is madness.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm mostly a N&P poster, but I follow quests on other sites and if one were to get so far beyond me that I felt I couldn't catch up, I would probably take it as a sign that I haven't actually been interested in keeping up with that one for some time, and drop it. There are definitely times when I have liked a quest enough to read through 200+ pages to catch back up though, sometimes on a site that doesn't keep its own archive, meaning I had to go to a second site to even read the parts that I had missed, and because I was still enjoying the content it didn't feel like a chore.

Broadly though, I feel that dipping in and out of, specifically, a discussion thread, and replying to comments without catching up on the conversation just seems like incredibly poor forum etiquette, that can only lead to a degradation in the quality of the discourse happening, no matter what the specific conversation is about.
 
*Slurps Tea*

Don't mind me, just having no draconesque in this diamond dog and Timberwolf show. I read main posts, don't vote and lurk.

This is the most discussion I've read with the quest, and I'm ambivalent either way.
 
Eh, personally I think the minimum standard is reading the main thread
marks, the osmosis of information will come after you get shot down enough times :V

Though, is this the right place to be having such a conversation?

And also, while I can't speak for others, I'm reading this thread to get a better idea of the lines and the reasoning of other parties involved, and trying to make concessions/clear up misunderstandings where possible...

And it's kind of hard to do so when I see what looks like a valid point, and then 50 other people jump on it with a sledgehammer (personal attacks, lack of good faith assumption -I can see how the evidence can be interpreted positively or negatively based on your initial stand, but- and general topic ender catchphrases)
and then by the time the train ends the original thread I wanted to see more people discuss has evaporated, leaving no conclusion I could take?
 
Aranfan said:
Because her family died after the questers decided that Chrysaliss' parthian shot should be to sack canterlot. The other options were Cadence or Shining Armor dying.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

More saliently, because the author decided her sadness over this should suddenly translate into suicide as a price for the resumption of the quest.
 
Last edited:

I noticed some people who expressed concerns about cult behavior and remarked about actual harm done have hearted a certain post so here are some info graphs.
 
Ralson said:
I need everybody to be clear and specific about how they're differentiating these accusations from story structure.



mythcreants.com

How to Pace Your Story

Conflict and intensity in a story must be timed to avoid both boredom and exhaustion.
mythcreants.com mythcreants.com
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I, with the assistance of my esteemed advocate council, would like to put forward a freedom of information request to find out where zoophilia fits within the graph.

With no further remarks forthwitdth, I yield my time to the esteemed council.
 
Shynka said:
I, with the assistance of my esteemed advocate council, would like to put forward a freedom of information request to find out where zoophilia fits within the graph.

With no further remarks forthwitdth, I yield my time to the esteemed council.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
...? Zoofilia? I think you must have misunderstood something, that doesn't really have anything to do with the discussion. Do you think that the canon depiction of the MLP wedding is problematic because it featured horses?
The questors never voted on anything close to zoophilia, the situation is that the groom got possessed right before his wedding, to another character, which the questors discover, and needed to react to.
They are all horses, sure, but so is everyone else.
 
Last edited:
First, what is probably a common disclaimer: I have not read this quest. (I tried, and bounced off after the first couple posts.) I don't, in general, enjoy horror as a genre. Not just because it is frequently carelessly transgressive, but because it often seems to attract an aura of careless transgression.

I think that while, in theory, it is probably possible to write and curate* a quest which handles rape as a plot point in a careful/mindful fashion such that it would be allowable. I do not think that, as a practical issue, that is even close to likely to happen. I also think that, based even on the most charitable takes in this thread, this quest definitely not a contender for that position.

*I use the word "curate" very intentionally, because it would likely take more time for the QM to act as a moderator to ensure that questers are behaving themselves, than it would to write updates.
 
Artemis_Fowl_2nd said:
...? Zoofilia? I think you must have misunderstood something, that doesn't really have anything to do with the discussion. Do you think that the canon depiction of the MLP wedding is problematic because it featured horses?
The questors never voted on anything close to zoophilia, the situation is that the groom got possessed right before his wedding, to another character, which the questors discover, and needed to react to.
They are all horses, sure, but so is everyone else.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I have been advised to plead that everyone writing and participating in the quest was most likely not a horse nor a pony, but without precise measurements of height at the withers of each participant, the latter part cannot be stated with adequate accuracy.
 
Shynka said:
I have been advised to plead that everyone writing and participating in the quest was most likely not a horse nor a pony, but without precise measurements of height at the withers of each participant, the latter part cannot be stated with adequate accuracy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It is REALLY hard to type with hooves you see. So the responses might take a while.
 
Shynka said:
I, with the assistance of my esteemed advocate council, would like to put forward a freedom of information request to find out where zoophilia fits within the graph.

With no further remarks forthwitdth, I yield my time to the esteemed council.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The climax.

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

I can kinda understand why someone would slather their story in warnings when their narrative is being spoken of like a guy who beats his wife. Especially when the discussion of what to do about the quest carries the same energy as dril's candle tweet. Which I'm not in anyway assuming is a majority position given its popularity, but see as common enough.

Other issues aside, it is, and titled as, a Pony Cult Simulator Quest, with a bunch of content warnings, what are people expecting out of the content when they go into it?
 
Dadarian said:
I'm of the full conviction that this dude needs to be permabanned. I don't see any utility to keeping BB on the forum for anyone except BB and the people who "play" his "quest".
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not opposed to the fundamental ability to tell dark, bleak stories, about rape, demonic possession, or any other subject. I cannot speak one way or another to the content of the quest we're discussing. But literally everything I have heard about this QM's behavior and the way in which he uses his position as the creator of a story in which many people are highly invested makes me absolutely certain that he is a toxic influence on this community and everyone who interacts with his quest.

So, yes. Ban him and draw a line around the quest for good. This is not a place of honor, and no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here.
 
It's always baffling to me how many people seem to think they can read an Appellant's mind during these proceedings. Whatever else is going on, BB was writing a story that as far as he knew was within the rules of SV, and I just don't buy this portrait some people are painting of him as this weird "tee hee sexual abuse like and subscribe" guy using bits and pieces of ex post facto information.

"He used a Funny once!" Give me a break. We can infract the guy without the tar and feathers, thanks.

Kirook said:
I'm not opposed to the fundamental ability to tell dark, bleak stories, about rape, demonic possession, or any other subject. I cannot speak one way or another to the content of the quest we're discussing. But literally everything I have heard about this QM's behavior and the way in which he uses his position as the creator of a story in which many people are highly invested makes me absolutely certain that he is a toxic influence on this community and everyone who interacts with his quest.

So, yes. Ban him and draw a line around the quest for good. This is not a place of honor, and no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And here's why - we have people calling for BB's banning based on nothing more than hearsay. That's.. not great either, folks.
 
Last edited:
Ralson said:
I need everybody to be clear and specific about how they're differentiating these accusations from story structure.



mythcreants.com

How to Pace Your Story

Conflict and intensity in a story must be timed to avoid both boredom and exhaustion.
mythcreants.com mythcreants.com
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You could just read the thread and spend a moment thinking about the multitudes of people who have spoken about the dynamics within the quest. Normally, narrative structure doesn't result in an parasocial-abusive relationship between writer and audience complete with what seems like trauma responses and cultish sunk cost facility. The fact that this looks like story structure is probably related to the whole situation happening using fiction as a hook. Unless you have something to say about all the people who have talked about getting fucked up and unable to get away from distressing experience of feeling like the writer is an extraordinary author who will surely get better, and it's worth it, and if everyone else is fine then clearly nothing is actually wrong because this writer is just soooo good.

Look, writers cultivate the culture of their quests. They cultivate their audience. I have written, I have made money from the audience I cultivated and made very specific choices in what I wanted regarding all of that. I have arguably written worse things than Bodi.

I did not build up a toxic relationship with my readers and I did not compel people into having breakdowns because their brains can no longer extract themselves from mu influence. That shit is not accidental. If it is somehow unintended in all ways then quite frankly there's a few things that may cause someone to do this shit "unaware", and it should still be considered malignant due to what it still effectively does. Harm.
 
Last edited:
Hyacinthium said:
I did not build up a toxic relationship with my readers and I did not compel people into having breakdowns because their brains can no longer extract themselves from mu influence. That shit is not accidental. If it is somehow unintended in all ways then quite frankly there's a few things that may cause someone to do this shit "unaware", and it should still be considered malignant due to what it still effectively does. Harm.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Alternately, the readers are adults who signed up for a "Mature" tagged quest, think the accusations in this thread (including literal abuse accusations) might be somewhat overblown, and are coming out to say "yo what the fuck"?
 
3 more messages…
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top