Dst's 'Cyber Sex' Post

[Sasha Lilias]

Dst. I post here because yours seems to be locked, probably because you know what others would say to you.

Firstly I have to say that I find it disgusting that you seem to always be looking out for other peoples mistakes when you have so many of your own. Hypocritical of me? Maybe, but still applies to yourself.
Secondly, I assume they would be in a very remote location, meaning high viscosity, to do such a thing. This would mean that:
1) Noobs wouldn't be able to access the area easily,
2) No one usually passes through.
3) That they knew what they were doing wasn't really "allowed" in the public, hence why they went for privacy.

[u][b]I am not defending their actions. I am criticising [i]yours.[/i][/b][/u]

You know that there are other ways of dealing with this than posting in public their names and what they were doing, especially in a topic that is locked for your own, nasty, needs, meaning they cannot defend themselves. Rather sly and despicable behaviour, no?

A while back you accused Fenrir of [u][b]Harrasment[/b][/u] and [u][b]Slander.[/b][/u] Hypocritical? Seeing as you do this regularly to nearly everyone.

As a final point I would like to add:

[u][i]Not everyone knows about the [b]Sunny Bedroom [/b]perhaps next time tell them the rules and about the fore-mentioned place.[/i][/u]

[b][i][u]~Sasha[/u][/i][/b]

[b][i][u]Link to Dst's Post- [/u][/i][/b][url="http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/10470-cyber-sex-strikes-again/"]http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/10470-cyber-sex-strikes-again/[/url]

Edited August 30, 2011 by Sasha Lilias

[Curiose]

I have to agree with what Sasha has been saying.

I am SICK and TIRED of all the harassment going on in this game. Where are all your spines, people? WHY AREN'T YOU STEPPING UP FOR WHAT YOU BELIVE FOR?

It's because you think that nothing will be done, right? Wrong.

There was absolutely NO need for this behavior. This is MALICIOUS and VINDICTIVE behavior simply because Dst dislikes Innocence and most of all, only wants to run people out of the game for her own personal pleasure.

[Shemhazaj]

[quote]1) Noobs wouldn't be able to access the area easily,
2) No one usually passes through.
3) That they knew what they were doing wasn't really "allowed" in the public, hence why they went for privacy.[/quote]


[i][color=#808080]Sasha, it was quoted before but I'll post it again with some parts in bold:[/color][/i]

[i][color=#808080][quote]As from now, due to the existance of a dedicated private place where you can talk anything you want, sexual explicit chats (more "types" pending to be added) will no longer be tolerated anywhere else in MD. This means that[b] if anyone catches you[/b] talking such things [b]anywhere[/b], labirint, [b]remote places[/b], not to mention public locations, you can get baned for it. There are a lot of kids playing and reading your ..things.. this can't be allowed anymore. Thank you for understanding.[/quote][/color][/i]

[i][color=#808080]and since where not knowing that something's illegal makes it ok to do so?[/color][/i]

[i][color=#808080]as for the part "I find it disgusting that you seem to always be looking out for other peoples mistakes when you have so many of your own. "[/color][/i]
[i][color=#808080]do you mean you'd treat the issue differently if someone else discovered it?[/color][/i]

[Sasha Lilias]

I am very well aware that is against the rules anywhere other than the Sunny Bedroom. This does not mean that everyone else does though, and no, this does not make it right, but would you send every criminal to jail for a crime as minor as this one? Or would you give them a warning?


[quote name='Shemhazaj' timestamp='1314731152' post='91080']

[i][color=#808080]as for the part "I find it disgusting that you seem to always be looking out for other peoples mistakes when you have so many of your own. "[/color][/i]
[i][color=#808080]do you mean you'd treat the issue differently if someone else discovered it?[/color][/i]
[/quote]

If they had dealt with it in the saw way as Dst has, then yes. But of course the wording would be different for they may not always be searching for everyone else's flaws. I was merely stating my feelings towards what Dst does in [b][i]general.[/i][/b]

[b]The rule is only in the announcements (as far as I know), and should be pinned somewhere more visible.[/b]

[Brulant]

[quote name='Sasha Lilias' timestamp='1314731626' post='91081']
[b]The rule is only in the announcements (as far as I know), and should be pinned somewhere more visible.[/b]
[/quote]

It seems like that's the only place you can find it.
The rules and restrictions page has this to say.

[quote]
"You can talk dirty things on chat, only if you are on a remote location on the map and not a public place, and if none of the players reading your crap will complain about it."
[/quote]

So at the very least the Restrictions page needs to be updated.

[Burns]

Indeed, Restrictions are outdated in many places by now. As are quite a few other pages you'll stumble over.

But, why did i actually post:

[quote]This does not mean that everyone else does though, and no, this does not make it right, but would you send every criminal to jail for a crime as minor as this one?[/quote]

I was personally involved in an incident when Mur found a couple making out in the Archives east wing and sent one of them to jail without further comment, took me 2 hours of sleep together with Grido to figure the whole situation and tell them why, how, and when they'll be 'united' again.

So, i guess we DO take people to prison for that. Btw, sentence was 1 week minimum, he got back out after 10 days.

[Mya Celestia]

[color=#008080][font=lucida sans unicode,lucida grande,sans-serif]I wish things were handled with more tact. The bluntness that many use comes across as quite harsh. It isn't necessary.[/font][/color]

[Amoran Kalamanira Kol]

It is well understood that this sort of behavior is against the rules, but I disagree with Dst's method of finding such behavior. The community of MD does not need a watch dog to harass them into behaving.

Most of us are adults between 18 and older. I'm sure we know how to behave like adults.

I have said this once and I will say it again: Use a strict method to punishing players for breaking rules. Be reasonable about it. Do not create a war path.

Haven't we seen too many war paths in the game already? Is there seriously a need for more useless arguments? No, there is absolutely not.

Give people room to correct their mistakes rather than attacking them for it, and absolutely never go after people and purposefully seek mistakes simply because you do not like them. That is pure abuse of any position said person might hold.


In regards to spells and rules:
I do not think the log spell was ever intended to be used as a way to punish people you dislike for whatever reason you might find at the time. To my knowledge, it's to be used for record keeping.

Perhaps it should be made clear that there is a list of rules at the top of the page called 'restrictions'. To those who have not read them, please do to avoid this sort of thing from happening again.

Edited August 30, 2011 by Amoran Kalamanira Kol

[duxie]

[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif] [/font][/size]
[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]first a wall i agree with Brulant. rules must be in restrictions page. it should be clearly defined - you must obey the rules in _restrictions_ page. not in announcements, not in AL, not in page footer or someones PL. cmon, people, that should be pretty clear why...[/font][/size]
[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]secondly, i think you must show the proof when accusing someone. not sure how, so unwanted eyes doesn't see it, but it is a must. at least for the person to try to explain himself. i've seen the chat dst is talking about in her first post. i was first in there to see it, so dst couldn't see more - it was the end of the conversation, and she came after me. there was nothing sexy in it. it was a conversation of a type: "you know i like you, i find you pretty", "oh, it's a pleasure to hear that".[/font][/size]
[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]and the third issue connected to the second one: not like i'm the type of such person, but i'm really interested in definition of cyber sex. can anyone explain me where are the limits of this thing? where it starts? i don't want to get blamed for leaving a compliment for someone in chat.[/font][/size]

[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif][edit:][/font][/size]
[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]hmm... log spell... still lots to learn... welp, maybe dst used that and knows more then i do, then i do apologize. but i saw her wandering around, just after i left *shrugs*. anyways, none saw more then i did in normal way, and it was nothing serious.[/font][/size]

Edited August 30, 2011 by duxie

[Curiose]

Again, I would have to agree with Amoran. The use of the Accoustic remains is not to go hunting down people. Dst is NOT someone who was given the right to go searching for people, humiliating them and overall harassing them by posting their name, location and what ever they were doing.

She is an LHO, NOT a police officer.

[dst]

Time to respond after the "great RP-er and cyber sex sexpert has posted" *cough*.

"It is well understood that this sort of behavior is against the rules, but I disagree with Dst's method of finding such behavior."
Sorry, as I told some people today: I flank The Good Manners and Diplomacy class. Sue me!

"Most of us are adults between 18 and older"
Errr...how would you know? I was not aware of the fact that you make statistics based on the age of the players.
Also, most is not enough.


"Haven't we seen too many war paths in the game already? Is there seriously a need for more useless arguments? No, there is absolutely not"
I totally agree. That's the reason why I asked for the topic I made to be closed. But apparently sasha felt an itch to comment. It's her right. But sasha, I advise you to scratch your itches in other ways. Learn something from the cyber sex-ers

"Give people room to correct their mistakes rather than attacking them for it, and absolutely never go after people and purposefully seek mistakes simply because you do not like them. That is pure abuse of any position said person might hold."

I don't like 90% of the MD population. So according to your logic I should never ever interact with them.Position? What position? Forum mod? Err...that's on the forum. LHO? I was never aware of the fact that LHOs posses any powers except the spells we receive and which I almost never use (except froggy cause it's funny).


"I do not think the log spell was ever intended to be used as a way to punish people you dislike for whatever reason you might find at the time. To my knowledge, it's to be used for record keeping. "
Oh dear amoran, dear amoran how innocence *cough* you are! You know as well as I do that spells are to be used in what manner the owner wants without having to respect any rules. C'mon! You disappoint me! Tzk tzk tzk tzk tzk...I'm going to sit in a corner and shed a tear for this great disappointment. Or not.


Let's see...who else should I reply to....Hmm...duxie (you're the lucky winner!)

"first a wall i agree with Brulant. rules must be in restrictions page. it should be clearly defined - you must obey the rules in _restrictions_ page. not in announcements, not in AL, not in page footer or someones PL. cmon, people, that should be pretty clear why.."
Ignorance is not an excuse. They are not noobs (or not all of them). They should have known by now how MD works. If not, there's always the possibility to ask someone. But apparently they did not care enough.

"[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]i think you must show the proof when accusing someone"[/font][/size]
[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]Newsflash! I've already sent the proofs to the Council.[/font][/size] And in case you're curios, I can tell you a small gossip: they are amators. Amoran here could confirm if she would see the chats


"[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]so dst couldn't see more - it was the end of the conversation, and she came after me. there was nothing sexy in it. it was a conversation of a type: "you know i like you, i find you pretty", "oh, it's a pleasure to hear that"."[/font][/size]
Dst couldn't see more? pfff...you really undeestimate me or...you have no idea how the spell works...


"[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]and the third issue connected to the second one: not like i'm the type of such person, but i'm really interested in definition of cyber sex. can anyone explain me where are the limits of this thing? where it starts?"[/font][/size]
[size=3][font=verdana,geneva,sans-serif]Amoran asked the same question 2 years ago and she got quite a lot of replies. I think you can still find the topic on the forum somewhere. [/font][/size]

The rest...hmm...you don't deserve my answers.

[Sasha Lilias]

Dst, you are fine example of what not to become.

You act as if you may do as you wish because you are some sort of demi-god, well NEWSFLASH!! Your not. You are just as touchable as all of us. There are no special rules that apply to you!

Have you realised that each time you try and get someone into trouble because you don't like them, or just for pleasure, you get another percentage of people that dislike you! Yes you have your little followers that think your amazing, but that's because you use a façade in front of them of which they are too blind to see through.

You may say that you don't care what other people think of you, and that you only care for what you think of others, but that is why eventually very few will care for you. Tonight you have shown your true colours as a malicious, sly, vindictive and obnoxious woman, though many of us knew this anyway.

My last comment to add:

If I hear of you using you "powers" to root out others for no reason but to get them into trouble for pure pleasure, then I will seriously think of speaking to the council in regards to your spells, and no...this is not a threat it's what I will do.

I hope you enjoy rotting in your pit of hatred, for we will all enjoy watching you do so.

[u][i][b]~Sasha[/b][/i][/u]

[Fyrd Argentus]

The documentation DOES need to be updated, especially where it conflicts with "rules published in the announcements". This was top of my "hate list" back when I kept a hate list.

[No one]

First of all, I never liked to see those things in chat and I do not usually pass through (not even pass by) places with such activities.
[quote name='Sasha Lilias' timestamp='1314729867' post='91073']
2) [b]No one [/b]usually passes through.
[/quote]


[quote name='Sasha Lilias' timestamp='1314729867' post='91073']
You know that there are other ways of dealing with this than posting in public their names and what they were doing, especially in a topic that is locked for your own, nasty, needs, meaning they cannot defend themselves. Rather sly and despicable behaviour, no?
[/quote]
And I agree with you Sasha, an instant ban on the ppl involved should fix the problem faster. But I guess she enjoys the fight.
And we already have an example (thank you Burns):
[quote name='Burns' timestamp='1314733453' post='91085']
I was personally involved in an incident when Mur found a couple making out in the Archives east wing and sent one of them to jail without further comment, ....

[/quote]


[quote name='Amoran Kalamanira Kol' timestamp='1314734394' post='91089']
It is well understood that this sort of behavior is against the rules, but I disagree with Dst's method of finding such behavior. The community of MD does not need a watch dog to harass them into behaving.

Most of us are adults between 18 and older. I'm sure we know how to behave like adults.

I have said this once and I will say it again: Use a strict method to punishing players for breaking rules. Be reasonable about it. Do not create a war path.
...
Give people room to correct their mistakes rather than attacking them for it, and absolutely never go after people and purposefully seek mistakes simply because you do not like them. That is pure abuse of any position said person might hold.
[/quote]
AKK, as much as I'd hate Dst's way of handling this kind of issues, you must agree that she managed to keep sex at bay.
Also some ppl should thank her for the Sunny Bedroom that gave them the possibility to "relax" without being banned.

By the way AKK, I don't understand: you want the ppl punished (banned as by example) or to give them time to repent (public humiliation). Please make up your mind.

And ... many may be 18 and older but even more behave like 15 and younger. There is a reason why this was forbidden and there should be no exceptions.

[quote name='Curiose' timestamp='1314736079' post='91093']
Again, I would have to agree with Amoran. The use of the Accoustic remains is not to go hunting down people. Dst is NOT someone who was given the right to go searching for people, humiliating them and overall harassing them by posting their name, location and what ever they were doing.
[/quote]
I agree with you too, ban them immediately and not for 10 days, but for 28 days.


So, considering that everybody agrees that an immediate punishment should be applied, then ... lets vote . I think that everyone that posted above would agree with it.

Edited August 30, 2011 by No one

[Chewett]

you make comments saying that dst likes the hunt, and all this rubbish, Yet purposely create a topic whereby she can gain, in your opinion, what she loves.

Again, like previous issues this is closed for 2 weeks. If MD council lie dormant on the issue then this can be re opened. Or if mur or council ask for it to be opened.

Any more posts created on this subject will be closed.

[Muratus del Mur]

[color=#808080][i](sorry chew i had to post after you closed it, you might want to open it again. Its good you closed it initially but some things need to be abswered by me on the cybersex topic)[/i][/color]

[b]The bad part 1[/b]
If the punk you are cybersexing with is under-aged, and because of his own imbecility his parents see the chat (keyloggers, parent monitoring, etc) MD (including the business and me as individual) will have to suffer terrible consequences for not asking you folks for age, checking it, putting all kind of shitty disclaimers for all sorts of frustrated people. And why not admit it, if it were my kid to do cybersex to someone online that he doesn't know a thing about i would react the same, quite violently.
MD is also not a dating site replacement. There are some people that might care about md for what it is while others will just open a chat window on some game called md that "allows it" and use it as you would use a tramp. I can't and won't "judge" your cybersex sessions to decide if it was fit or unfit to md spirit (imagine that!!), so there is no way "some" cybersex is fine while other is not fine, thats just ridiculous.


[b]The bad part 2[/b]
MD rules are built around a core of freedom. There are enough bending opportunities for every taste. forbidding cybersex conflicts with a basic concept ..the one that pushes me to expand the land. Its not like if we are all in one scene and bother eachother. MD is also not an academic gathering where you need to behave. Human behaviour in md is taged by what is called here role, or role-play. If your character is a culprit, if you talk shit, if you do bad things, that is you, fine with me. There are and will be rules against it, IF and only IF you get caught. There is a thin line where i put this freedom core aside and use unfair tools against "criminals", such as IP ban, log review and so on. I use those just when they get out of their role and the damage they do reaches out of md concept. CYBERSEX is not a crime, cybersex is a risk, a double risk. One part of the risk is that it will break that thin line between your character and you as a human citizen. The other risk is to the purpose and concept of md. The moment you use something out of md as a tool for other activities, and by that i mean here using the chat as a tool unrelated to md, you affect md concepts, you "rp" outside of md, but being in md so to say. I dont know how to explain better, i hope you ppl understand.


[b]The ugly part[/b]

Rules are rules, not applying them is not an option. The cybersex rule was not meant to be used for hunting people, but spells can be used as their owner wishes and hunting someone to find its potential crimes is also not a crime..otherwise police would be doing a crime by simply existing.
The only way i see to balance this serious situation that puts in conflict two solid md concepts, is through a new spell. If there is an ability to digg the past there should be an ability to hide the past. You will see what i mean in the announcements and no its not a chat delete spell, ..sort of.


I hope you read careful what i said in here because i said a lot in a way

[Muratus del Mur]

I will take a decision on this incident when i return in one week