No force rp.

[Altair_Carter]

Come to the server and see, before you judge.

I don't actually need to come to the server and see, judging by how Internet makes people degrade at very high capacities.

[JDC]

The response was just what I expected.
 
I find it funny that the very same people who have criticized me heavily wouldn't dare lift a finger when Aragorn told the IC/OOCers to fuck off.
 
And they call me a hypocrite...

[CaptainCrazy]

The response was just what I expected.
 
I find it funny that the very same people who have criticized me heavily wouldn't dare lift a finger when Aragorn told the IC/OOCers to f**k off.
 
And they call me a hypocrite...

Isn't that obvious, man?

Owners are clearly against IC/OOC, there's no doubt about it. But everyone deserves to be respected for what kind of way they wish to play, not forced to be using the type of roleplay methods the majority of veterans do (This includes you and your MTA:VC fantasy)

You can't expect respect if you ain't showing respect yourself.

[Altair_Carter]

Owners numerous times told that they created Argonath only for it to award players freedom of imagination and style they play.

There won't be any rule such as "IC/OOC resemblance is forbidden" as
1) It ruins the style of play of others, and Argonath is for freedom of play (In a smart way)
2) It's one step towards creating a jungle of rules.

[9r2e5i3k]

@Altair
But owners already said that IC/OOC is not a "style", but a rule.

And what creates more of a jungle?

One rule (no IC/OOC allowed) or at least two required-to-know definitions (IC/OOC) and adjusting all rules to fit IC/OOC (because our super-intelligent players that can play 67 styles at once can't understand simplest rules and need them written for every exception and "style" separately)?

Flaming for example. NO FLAMING is almost never understood by players using IC/OOC, when they flame they ALWAYS use the excuse "but it was IC". inb4 only retardicoocfanaticsusethat, no not only.

[Altair_Carter]

And what about people from other servers with theese so-called rules, who join here?

[9r2e5i3k]

They should play by Argonath rules, not by the other rules. Just because it's a similar game mode, does not mean rules are same, or even compatible at some points.

You don't go from a desk job to a construction site job and demand a clean desk and no noise.

If you want other rules so much that you can't play otherwise - stay at the other servers...

[Frank_Hawk]

Grizzy - from what I gather, the owners have assessed the threat of IC/OOC and have concluded there is no requirement to make it a rule set in stone.  All those who continue to detest this practise including you must accept the fact there is no rule outlawing IC/OOC. In turn you and others continue to accept jeopardising your stance in line with current Argonath rules - which clearly state no indication of IC/OOC principles being outlawed to date. If you and others continue to disagree with what the owners have written - make a topic in SA:MP ideas to outlaw it.

Players, being creative and imaginative - began to mixing a toned down version of IC/OOC and the Argonath vision of RP together. The integration in my view, progressed well enough to make it difficult to differentiate between IC/OOC and Argonath RP in certain scenarios. Over time, this has become more popular and trends continue to support this. As Jcstodds described, people began to realise that in certain scenarios IC/OOC could help to overcome communication barriers and disengage in-game activity for those who are in a less fortunate and comprehending position. This is in stark contrast to all those who are labelled ambassadors of IC/OOC (tom, dick and harry) where our neighbouring IC/OOC communities would laugh at them and rightfully so. 

[CaptainCrazy]

Flaming for example. NO FLAMING is almost never understood by players using IC/OOC, when they flame they ALWAYS use the excuse "but it was IC".

If IC/OOC is something you blame your flaming/insults over, what isn't "slang" then?

[Pablo]

The response was just what I expected.
 
I find it funny that the very same people who have criticized me heavily wouldn't dare lift a finger when Aragorn told the IC/OOCers to f**k off.
 
And they call me a hypocrite...

BECAUSE YOU ARE HYPOCRITE YES AND IM GONNA WRITE ALL OVER IN CAPS LIKE YOUR BUDDY GIAC JR BECAUSE WHEN HE WRITES IN CAPS HES ALWAYS RIGHT.

And what about people from other servers with theese so-called rules, who join here?

Probably, they will have no place there, and after they see how they treat people who support strict roleplay (meanly which is giving most effort to roleplay, not "OMG YOU ARE RLRP GTFO TO RLRLP SREERV MGGOMG") and how they enforce 'no ooc/ic' rule, they leave.



:ps: Oh, Sorry, I cannot be so polite all the time.

[Leon.]

Not all IC/OOC users use "IT WAS IC" as an excuse for flaming. When I used to be mostly IC/OOC, I flamed in what would be "IC" and got caught. I explained to the player that the flaming was directed at his character, not him personally, however I only used this to reduce the amount of offensiveness. I then proceeded to apologize along the lines of... "I sincerely apologize if my words had actually offended you," and accepted responsibility for my actions, as I knew Argonath rules prevent flaming even in the would-be "IC." I didn't complain about the punishment. I damn well knew the policy regarding flame, IC or not.

I explained to the player that the flaming was directed at his character, not him personally, however I only used this to reduce the amount of offensiveness." You might say that's still using "IT WAS IC" as an excuse. See, it's not even an excuse in the first place, because I'm not using it to clean my ass of punishment. Notice how I directed it at the player I flamed and the intentions I said it with. I wasn't thinking "MAN I HOPE THE ADMIN WILL ACCEPT MY EXCUSE," but rather, "Man, I hope I can make this player feel less bad." There has been a time where I said "fuck you" in a phone conversation. The player got a bit offended by it. I proceeded to PM him something along the lines of...
"Hey man, I did not mean to personally insult you. The insult was directed at your roleplay character, however I know this is no excuse for whatever harm I may have done. Therefore, I sincerely apologize to you for the insult I have thrown at you, and hope for your utmost forgiveness." The admin is happy that I apologized, the player is happy that I apologized, the player is also happy that I did not literally mean the insult, and I'm happy that they're happy.
Today, when I wish to "ICly" flame someone, I come to a mutual agreement with the player. For example:
"Hey man, I just want to know if it'd be alright if I could flame a bit. I'd like you remind you that whatever I say is not in any way meant to insult you personally."
And every single time, the player would respond:
"Yeah man, it's alright."
We'd later on be telling each other how we lol'd at the insults we gave.
"Haha, I liked that joke where you said 'yo mama so fat.............'"
"Yeah man, I liked when you said you'd shove your foot so far up my...... LOL"

Using IC to void admin punishment, as almost everyone knows, is not a viable thing to do. The rules clearly state flaming is not allowed, IC or not. Saying it was in-character, in my case, is used to lift the weight of the insult off of the victim's shoulders. And often, premeditating flaming in-character with the "victim" is a perfectly fine solution, as usually the player would clearly state he/she is alright with your inflammatory remarks and completely understands that you in no way mean anything you have said personally.

TL;DR
Saying "fuck you" in /l and being punished for it by an admin is NOT the right time to use "IT WAS IC." The right time to do that is when you are apologizing to the player. The player will usually feel much better after you tell them the insult was not directed at them personally, but not all the time! If you MUST flame in IC, I offer this advice. Either:
1. Make a mutual agreement with you and the flamed.
OR
2. Don't do it AT ALL.
If you can't possibly do number 2, make the flame look harmless! Example:
"I'm going to fucking kill your whole entire family, you retarded fucking bastard of a bitch" some people I know would be going "ROFL" at that, but not everybody will do that!
Of course, this is a HIGHLY offensive remark. You can easily make it harmless by swapping some words with silly words... like
"I'm going to 'feed' your family some 'mashed potatoes', you silly dilly goose!"
Feed - kill
your family some 'mashed potatoes' - kill your whole entire family
you retarded fucking bastard of a bitch - you silly dilly goose!
Often, swapping words with harmless ones makes the statement more hilarious! When I want to call someone a fucking retard in the main chat, I just say "you silly goose!" instead of "you fucking retard." It often results in some minor lols.
And even shorter TL;DR:
IC is NOT an excuse to flame in Argonath RPG. Flaming is COMPLETELY intolerable for good reasons. "IT WAS IC" should only be used in apology, not in defense to admin punishment, as it's for the other player's sake, not yours.. Mutual agreements to flame in IC often results in a MUCH better outcome than what would have happened without the agreement.
And the people who use "IT WAS IC" to actually try to defend themselves from admin punishment deserve a ban for complete ignorance, in my opinion. But Argonath doesn't ban ignorance.


Here's an actual situation that involved a mutual agreement to flame. This is a little different, because I made the mutual agreement a bit later in the roleplay situation, right when things were about to get out of hand. Mutual agreements should be made BEFOREHAND. Names have been changed because I just don't feel like trying to remember them. I have that problem. I'll remember faces, conversations, and activities, but NOT names! No wonder I'm so bad with women.
Note, this was all over the phone.
Bob: Hello, Leon. I have one of your boys here with me.
Leon: Who the fuck is this?
Bob: It's Bob. If you want him alive, you'll pay me 10,000 dollars.
Leon: Man, fuck you! I ain't paying shit!
Bob: Okay then, I'll just have to kill him.
Leon: Fuck you! You're a cruel son of a bitch you know that?
Bob: Hold on Leon. Hey, you know this is just RP right?
Leon: Yeah. Sorry about that, I didn't mean to actually flame you.
Bob: It's okay.
Leon: Hey, you don't mind if I do a little bit of roleplay flaming, do you?
Bob: Yeah sure.
Leon: Alright, just so you know, I don't mean anything that I say to you.
Bob: Same here.
and it went on with lots of lols
Note that this was off of my terrible memory, and is likely highly inaccurate. The only accurate part is where the mutual agreement was made. And the person I flamed took offense to what I said, however, no admin punishment was taken, because I apologized to him and explained what I meant by it, and he accepted it! We agreed to flame for then until the RP situation was over, and it ended without problems. It allowed the full potential of the kidnap between criminal groups RP scenario to come out (where the kidnapped's friends or whatever would be in total rage against the kidnapper and where the kidnapper would be trying to calm him down ["Shut the fuck up or I kill him!"]).

[Void]

The only accurate part is where the mutual agreement was made. And the person I flamed took offense to what I said, however, no admin punishment was taken, because I apologized to him and explained what I meant by it, and he accepted it! We agreed to flame for then until the RP situation was over, and it ended without problems. It allowed the full potential of the kidnap between criminal groups RP scenario to come out (where the kidnapped's friends or whatever would be in total rage against the kidnapper and where the kidnapper would be trying to calm him down ["Shut the f**k up or I kill him!"]).

If IC/OOC is something you blame your flaming/insults over, what isn't "slang" then?

YES.

[9r2e5i3k]

@Frank
There is no rule directly allowing or even supporting it either, or any rule allowing exceptions from basic rules for IC or OOC context. If players are going to put other server's rules and habits topping over Argonath rules, they are indeed going to be punished. Though as long as there are no collisions between the sets of rules (no Argonath rules are broken), no [administrative] actions from me.

I'm only "outlawing" it clan-side. Same privilege as supporting and requiring it clan/group side.

If players are so creative and imaginative, I wonder why can't they just play by pure Argonath rules instead of trying to mix and blend rules, and use the creativity and imagination for role-play scenarios instead.


@CaptainCrazy
Problem is not what I consider "slang", problem is what the IC/OOC users (or actually anyone flame-happy) consider "slang".
If slang for you is only flaming and swearing at others, then you better not use "slang" at all.


@Pablo
go away, you're more biased than JDC


@Weegee
There is never a situation where someone "must" flame.

[Gandalf]

If RLRP players leave it is because they can not handle RP. They need a big set of rules, and things that give them money automatically, as the concept of earning money through work is alien to them.

As for IC/OOC, we do not care as long as people do not treat it as "better". If we would ever have to make a rule on it, the rule wil be to forbid the use.

[Jamal]

JDC want to shit post on IC/OOC users and tel lus its not allowed again? lmao