NationStates Jolt Archive

This is the second "rp" I've seen today that directly flamebaits furries.

It will be the last, or there will be bannings.

I am rather vexed on the whole situaton. Why was the alliance closed, but not the RP threads that spawned it?

And who exactly is in 'trouble'? I'm hoping I'm not one of them, seeing as pretty much all of my actions in that thread and others are RPed.

Why was the alliance closed, but not the RP threads that spawned it?

Links? I'll check, but note that Kat's comment says "directly flamebaits furries".

I'm hoping I'm not one of them, seeing as pretty much all of my actions in that thread and others are RPed.

No, you're not in trouble. Indeed, yours and others' genuine RPing was one of the reasons I asked for another mod's advice, rather than close it the minute I happened on it.

I think it's possible for skilled RPers to do RPs that explore real-life situations, however unpleasant. You and a couple of others were plainly trying to do that. But, on balance, the basic idea of the thread was "Furries bad! Kill 'em now!" and even the best writers couldn't have saved it from being a flamefest.

Think about how you'd react if the alliance had been directed against ... Americans? Australians? gays? Jews? Muslims? There's a difference between RPs that look at what happens if a state uses violence against a group, and RPs that are, or turn into, incitements to use violence against a group.

Mods aren't here to make NS nations into nice, safe places where nothing bad ever happens. But it's our job to keep the forums open to NS players.

It wasn't a decision made just because the word "furries" was used. It's a judgement call. It should work as a heads-up to players to use judgement too.

There's nothing wrong with alliances directed at stamping out undesirables. The Anti-Comintern Pact, for example, was created specifically to prevent the spread of communism and inhibit the expansion of communist states. The Crusades were carried out by what was basicly an alliance of Christians against Muslims. NATO was formed specifically to work against the Russians.

There is nothing that should prevent anyone from creating an alliance to work against whatever threat they may see, be it gay nations, Jewish nations, furry nations, communist nations, white nations, or whatever. There is nothing inherently flamebaiting in creating an alliance to work against or even destroy a specific group, and there was nothing flamebaiting in the AFA thread except for the furry supporters that invoked Godwin's Law every third post.

I thought it had RP potential.

I thought it had RP potential.

Yeah, I don't see why the alliance itself cannot exist. I will be the first to admit that the thread was about to go over the edge -- and I will also admit that I played a part in it, unfortunately -- but as for the alliance itself, I see nothing inherently wrong about it, RP-wise.

While I can accept the current thread staying closed, due to the fact it seems to be a Pandora's Box, I would like to ask if another thread can be made in its place, have the old thread deleted, and have everyone carry on in a more...serious manner, perhaps (myself included).

Communism is an ideology, it is not a person. The Crusades and NATO are also not NS events.

Considering furry is mostly a fandom, I fail to see how it cannot be seen as an ideology. People are not born furries (although some might argue that they were) anymore than they are born Lord of the Rings fans.

Communism is an ideology, it is not a person. The Crusades and NATO are also not NS events.

This is relevant...how?

Oh, and "Furryism" is not a person, either.

What are "furries"? :confused:

What are "furries"? :confused:

You don't want to know. But if you do, then read this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furry_fandom).

This is relevant...how?

Oh, and "Furryism" is not a person, either.

Didn't read Shander's post above?

I don't see how they're any different from some of what I RP.

For those not familiar with my RP, my nation was invaded by an extremist Catholic theocracy and ICly anti-Catholicism became a major problem. (The comparison I use is, imagine if 9/11 were done by Catholics rather than Muslim extremists, and the death toll were 3,000,000 rather than 3,000.)

So, a lot of my posts bash Catholics a lot more viciously than what the furry threads do to furries (burning churches, pack raping Catholic girls, etc.) But it's all IC.

I've deleted my post because the mods are discussing this.

Didn't read Shander's post above?

I did read it, which is how I came to the conclusion your post was entirely irrelevant. It's like having a discussion of what to do with an ant problem, and then someone says "ants have six legs." Well, that's fine and dandy, but entirely irrelevant.

I did read it, which is how I came to the conclusion your post was entirely irrelevant. It's like having a discussion of what to do with an ant problem, and then someone says "ants have six legs." Well, that's fine and dandy, but entirely irrelevant.

Then you fail at reading comprehension. Communism is different from being African, one is an ideology and the other is an inseparable part of what you are. Why it's generally been ok to attack communists is because it's an ideological choice, whereas DecA and CM's choice to attack groups of specific peoples based on race were generally not considered ok, was because (among other things) being black is not a choice you can make. Plus threads attacking ethnic groups have had a historical tendency to be nothing more than excuses to flame people of $_group.

I might be more willing to side with Tocrowkia on this if I hadn't spotted him repeatedly quoting a furry RPer and correcting his spelling, which is obnoxious at best and baiting at worst.

Then you fail at reading comprehension. Communism is different from being African, one is an ideology and the other is an inseparable part of what you are. Why it's generally been ok to attack communists is because it's an ideological choice, whereas DecA and CM's choice to attack groups of specific peoples based on race were generally not considered ok, was because (among other things) being black is not a choice you can make. Plus threads attacking ethnic groups have had a historical tendency to be nothing more than excuses to flame people of $_group.

Yes... yes I know ants have six legs. So what?

Also, the furry fandom is not an ethnic group.

I might be more willing to side with Tocrowkia on this if I hadn't spotted him repeatedly quoting a furry RPer and correcting his spelling, which is obnoxious at best and baiting at worst.

...For one thing, only once do I recall ever pointing out the errors in FFI's posts. And other people have pointed that very same thing out in a less polite manner than my self (see this thread:http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=534268 ), which means your point is flawed at best and baseless at worst.

Think about how you'd react if the alliance had been directed against ... Americans? Australians? gays? Jews? Muslims?

Have you ever set foot into II? Some how I think not, we've had everything from anti muslims to anti-jews, hell, some nations are overtly anti-black or japanese, or anime fans.

The list goes on, you can meet someone with a nation that hates something no matter what the criteria is. Thus is the world also, get used to it.

I'm not involved in this furry thing, but just happened to see this thread as I was in this particular forum for other reasons...

I do think all the furry threads are bad for the international incidents forum. If I were a new player looking at international incidents for the first time, I'd write the forum off as nonsense if I saw a ton of furry threads.

I think it's possible for skilled RPers to do RPs that explore real-life situations, however unpleasant. You and a couple of others were plainly trying to do that. But, on balance, the basic idea of the thread was "Furries bad! Kill 'em now!" and even the best writers couldn't have saved it from being a flamefest.

Think about how you'd react if the alliance had been directed against ... Americans? Australians? gays? Jews? Muslims?


*chuckles* Oh man, we finally get a mod that actually tries to mod the RPs themselves and they manage to FUBAR it by busting up a tradition in II.

First, at least half of the wars in II are fueled by hatred of some group. It's simply part of what makes II tick. If you attempted to lock every such war, you wouldn't have time to even eat. The other mods have resigned themselves to this fact and simple don't even try.

Second, the point of the RP, as I understand it, was simply to kill furries. That's another tradition in II, killing groups or nations in massive numbers. The number of nations Automagfreek has extirpated simply because he wanted to are too many to count. The largest nuking in II history had a combined yield (from all warheads) in the tens of gigatons.

Stick around in II for a while, you'll find we're rather callous where mass destruction is concerned. In fact, we revel in it. It's pretty pointless to get upset and close a thread every time that happens. You'll never do anything else otherwise.

SS, I think you're kinda missing the point:

While most of II's healthy hatred of communists, capitalists, Jews, Nazis, Arabs, Muslims, Buddhists, Catholics, and myriad other groups is perfectly IC and well-contained, this particular thread appears to have spilled over into OOC, where it became flamebaiting. (Try walking into General and referring to everyone who disagrees with you as a heathen pervert infidel heretic, and see how far you get.) I'm not acquainted with the thread myself (ironically enough), but I'm guessing that's why it was locked; otherwise, ignore me.

SS, I think you're kinda missing the point:

While most of II's healthy hatred of communists, capitalists, Jews, Nazis, Arabs, Muslims, Buddhists, Catholics, and myriad other groups is perfectly IC and well-contained, this particular thread appears to have spilled over into OOC, where it became flamebaiting. (Try walking into General and referring to everyone who disagrees with you as a heathen pervert infidel heretic, and see how far you get.) I'm not acquainted with the thread myself (ironically enough), but I'm guessing that's why it was locked; otherwise, ignore me.


I try to avoid General because any little disagreement turns into a flamefest of epic proportions. If it did spill over into OOC, I can see why the threads were closed. That wasn't the impression I got from Ardchoille's explanation, but I've misread things before.

Most of the OOC banter was over the character motives, like why this character was so defensive and why this other character was saying silly things and so on. As far as I saw, there was no OOC flamebaiting.

Most of the OOC banter was over the character motives, like why this character was so defensive and why this other character was saying silly things and so on. As far as I saw, there was no OOC flamebaiting.

Correct. However, it was rather...silly...so I can't necessarily object too much to the locking of the thread, ON THAT BASIS.

However, I would request that the current AFA thread be deleted, and a new one be allowed to be made, just without the...silliness...of the previous, as that's really what helped cause the locking.

However, I would request that the current AFA thread be deleted, and a new one be allowed to be made, just without the...silliness...of the previous, as that's really what helped cause the locking.

Go for it, Derscon -- run free! (Run free carefully, though, okay?)

It wasn't the silliness, so much as the fact that when I read 'em late last night, my time, several of the newer posters' stuff read like OOC, rather than IC -- flaming comments on real-life furries, some of whom might well be NS members. Knowing that II doesn't get nannied the way, uh, certain other forums do, and seeing some actual RP going on, I didn't want to just jump in and close it, so I talked to the other available mod. It ended up closed because there'd already been another incident on the same topic elsewhere. In short, just the situation Steel and Fire was guessing at.

Except that I'd got it wrong, as was pointed out to me this morning (well, actually, it was the burning matches under the fingernails that made me admit it). The stuff was IC and permissible.

But yes, I did know that II regularly annihilates whole swathes of lifeforce; yes, I have scuttled through II occasionally (once a nasty bad man raped my Catholic priest character and torched his parishioners, and I wish I could remember who it was, now I'm a mod ... heh heh heh ...); and no, I wasn't trying to mod the RP itself, though apparently I gave that impression. I was there because of that insane double post thing Jolt does, and it developed because of the earlier furry angle.

Which is not to say II RPs won't get modded, if they go off the rails. Still, I'm a bit surprised anyone seriously thought a single mod, and the newest one, at that, would just chuck out the convention that makes possible all the UN non-compliance RPs, and the religious war RPs, and ... but, hey, I'm in no position to criticise others for misunderstanding.

Are you sure you want to persecute furries, though, guys? Honest, persecuting Australians would be much more fun ...

Are you sure you want to persecute furries, though, guys? Honest, persecuting Australians would be much more fun ...

Are you kidding, Australians would kick their ass! XD