NationStates Jolt Archive

I'd like to, in a few hours probably, submit a prospective RP between Sevaris and I, for a review. We've already edited out the major parts we think would be problems, like all the scenes involving RG officers "clubs" and such. But neither of us wants to take a risk of deletion with the deletion crazes seeming to be sweeping NS lately.

Neither of us thinks it is wrong or inappropriate, but there have often been disagreements between RPers and mods over what is and isn't appropriate, and since no officially sanctioned guidelines exist, we'd therefore like to submit it for review.


Thank you.

VoteEarly, it is your responsibility, not ours, to ensure that your posts are appropriate for posting in the forums. It is not in our job description to "OK" posts for content before they are posted.

With that said, I do appreciate that you are making the effort to stay within the rules. Although I don't believe it has been "officially" sanctioned, this thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=395843&page=1) serves as a good rule of thumb.

If you wish to have your post reviewed, I am sure there are people out there - the #nationstates IRC channel springs to mind - who would be happy to review it for you; but it's not our job, and we are not about to start doing so.

~ Tsar the Mod.

I've submitted a few before, they were reviewed and given back to me. One outright rejected, one was suggested to be edited, which I did.



Anyway, I think it's rather good, Sevaris thinks it's rather good, we cut about 10 pages of pages we figured were not required for the plot and were mostly just inappropriate anyway. Folks don't need to be told what goes on in an RG officer's club (brothel) they can figure it out for themselves, that makes sense, right?

I'd gladly review it for you. Granted, I'm not a mod, but I'd like to think that I have a fair understanding of the recent Guidelines submitted.

It is not in our job description to "OK" posts for content before they are posted.

However, it does happen farily often that it appears to be part of your job description... In this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8157534&postcount=8) very post Treznor relates that he asked the mods for an a-okay on a post he was going to make/had made and was given a ruling one way or another for it.

If I was VE, I, too, would've asked for a review of such a post, considering he was deleted for inappropriate content in his last incarnation.

However, it does happen farily often that it appears to be part of your job description... In this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8157534&postcount=8) very post Treznor relates that he asked the mods for an a-okay on a post he was going to make/had made and was given a ruling one way or another for it.

If I was VE, I, too, would've asked for a review of such a post, considering he was deleted for inappropriate content in his last incarnation.


Since the mods seem to read all of my stuff anyway, possibly to look for a reason to delete me (I dunno, maybe, maybe not, no offense, just a theory), it'd make sense they ought to read it before I post to help me avoid trouble. Anyway, just a thought.

Hm.

Well, long ago firefighters used to come out and rescue pets from trees. It was a nice thing for them to do, and it was helpful. However, just because they did it doesn't mean it was part of their job. Eventually, they stopped doing it because it was a waste of their time and, well, they aren't the only people with ladders.

Firefighters put out fires.

Moderators remove posts in violation of rules.

Firefighters can (but would rather not) rescue pets from trees.

Moderators can (but would rather not) rescue posters from themselves.

And the fact that you removed 10 pages of smut disturbs me more than you'd probably believe. You do know that there are erotic story websites you can submit to, right? I'm sure they'll accept your ass-rape fantasies.

And the fact that you removed 10 pages of smut disturbs me more than you'd probably believe. You do know that there are erotic story websites you can submit to, right? I'm sure they'll accept your ass-rape fantasies.


The 10 pages had nothing to do with anal sex.

And I get sick and tired of hearing people call consensual anal sex, "ass-rape" how is it rape just because you don't like it?

If I don't like oral sex, but your wife consents and does it for you, can I say you "orally raped" her, just because I find that particular form of sex odd and wrong?

But anyway, let's not get off topic...


As for the matter of removing pages, out of 100 pages, 10 were deemed by Sevaris and I to need removing, is that really mean it's something we ought to post on a sex site? I think not, it was just a bit iffy in a few pages (10 percent of pages to be exact).

Setting aside the fact that you have written about non-consensual sex before...

Between various puppets and incarnations, I've written over a thousand pages worth of RP, and somehow I've managed to never felt the need to edit out from my rough drafts, let alone 10 percent of my content. Do you have any concept of how staggering that figure is? 10 percent of a single story is smut?

You know, not every log from private IRC rooms needs to be posted. Just print out a copy for those lonely nights and leave the rest of us out of it, kay?

I've never RPed over IRC before. Anyway, I try to RP what the RL is like, which is why my right-wing regime, which I consider ideal from a political standpoint, is rife with problems I think would be inherent in a right-wing regime (cronyism, corruption, nobles doing as they wanted, lack of morality amongst many). Also, you'll notice I don't RP everybody holding hands and singing campfire songs. Murder, war, genocide, rape, etc, it's a part of the real world, as awful as that is, and I like to try to keep a degree of realism to my stuff.

Also I'm very pessimistic about RL morality and such, and I try to show that in my works, most people in my RPs are totally depraved, non-elect, reprobate. (This reflects a RL view of mine)

However, it does happen farily often that it appears to be part of your job description... In this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8157534&postcount=8) very post Treznor relates that he asked the mods for an a-okay on a post he was going to make/had made and was given a ruling one way or another for it.Um, no dear. To clarify again, I asked for a ruling after I was accused of flaming. I didn't ask for a Moderator's opinion until someone else forced the issue.

In VE's case, I take it as a good sign that he's asking for people to review his work, although I admit to being disturbed by the description of how much smut was edited out after the fact. However, it's important for people to realise that the Moderators simply don't have enough time to check everyone's posts for content. Making unnecessary work for them is not going to endear them to you.

As I'm fond of saying, "If you have to ask, the answer is probably 'no.'" Be paranoid and assume that risky material needs to be handled with extreme caution, if it really needs to be handled at all.

In VE's case, I take it as a good sign that he's asking for people to review his work, although I admit to being disturbed by the description of how much smut was edited out after the fact.





It was edited after Sevaris and I discussed it and decided it wasn't acceptable.

Euroslavia reviewed it and made some suggestions, he seemed to go very prudish in regard to the language used. What can I say, MSers love to swear and curse at foreigners, it's in their character. Anyway, I took some of his suggestions and made some of the iffy seduction scene even more implied and skipped over. So I think it's probably post worthy now.

It was edited after Sevaris and I discussed it and decided it wasn't acceptable.Good for you: you might avoid getting deleted this time if you keep that up. My point stands, however.

Um, no dear. To clarify again, I asked for a ruling after I was accused of flaming. I didn't ask for a Moderator's opinion until someone else forced the issue.

Trez, I stated, quite clearly I might add that I might've been wrong in termonology within the post with the did ask/had made analogy as I wasn't clear myself what had occured first; hence, why I linked to it. ;)

Nevertheless, you still asked.

Nevertheless, you still asked.I did ask, but I think the important thing to remember within the context of this thread was that I asked after the legitimacy of the post was called into question, not before.

And I thought I'd done such a good job of explaining the timeline of events, too. Bleah.

I wasn't trying to provoke you or anything; I'm just saying that it's been asked before and after a post.

I wasn't trying to provoke you or anything; I'm just saying that it's been asked before and after a post.I didn't mean to imply that I'm being provoked, I merely wished to make sure that my position is clear. Bugging the Moderators about something before there's a problem is, in my opinion, bad form. They don't need the extra work. There are plenty of other people available to answer questions.

I'm also of the opinion that if you have to ask, you should probably assume you're doing it wrong anyway. It's perhaps not as much fun that way, but for people with a bad history on the forums it's safer. Pushing the boundaries of acceptable content is not a healthy vocation.