Discussion on question by Anon: I've killed my colleagues' characters during RPG session, now they won't talk to me

10:22 AM

@albanx I don't really understand what you want to say? That they behave like ten year olds because they play DnD?

@albanx Make sure to be nice; there are people who think that message is offensive.

There were three flags before they were cleared.

And actually, Dungeons and Dragons is not a "kiddie game". A single game can go on for years, and novels-worth of rulebooks are required to hold the rules, not a single piece of paper.

albanx

1:30 PM

@Patta no you're misunderstood. I meant the fact that they stop talking to him and excluded from social activities., this is what makes them behave like childs

@wizzwizz4 this is really sad, a comment is flaged and deleted because people do not agree with that? I did offended no one and I said no rough words... I never said DnD is a kiddie game, I said the way they behave is kiddie. We play role games in launch break every day in my workplace

wizzwizz4

@albanx Erm... no, it was not deleted. ~~Please check your facts before you reply.~~ Ah, I see. You didn't notice that it was migrated.

albanx

@wizzwizz4 It was deleted, I just added back now (changing it slightly)

wizzwizz4

It was flagged, but they were cleared. That means that the flags went away without being acted on.

@albanx Please don't. It's right here:

20 hours ago, by albanx

That is a game, if you could kill you colleagues characters you did VERY WELL, at least you know now with what type of unmature people you have to deal with. Indeed I would go further more and make fun of them for behaving like 10 years old child. Such persons are very easy to manipulate

It was migrated to this chatroom.

albanx

Ah

Migrated

But I want to leave my opionion on the comments

wizzwizz4

There's a link in the comments to this thread.

Comments aren't for opinions; people use them for that, but it's not really what they're for.

albanx

1:37 PM

What are comments for, then?

Reply aren't for opinions

wizzwizz4

@albanx See this page.

You should submit a comment if you want to:
• Request clarification from the author;
• Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;
• Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).

albanx

mine is a "Leave constructive criticism" that helps the author to not feel bad

wizzwizz4

Comments are not recommended for any of the following:
• Suggesting corrections that don't fundamentally change the meaning of the post; instead, make or suggest an edit;
• Answering a question or providing an alternate solution to an existing answer; instead, post an actual answer (or edit to expand an existing one);
• Compliments which do not add new information ("+1, great answer!"); instead, up-vote it and pay it forward;
• Criticisms which do not add anything constructive ("-1, see previous comments you scallywag!"); instead, down-vote (and provide or up-vote a better answer if appropr…

> Secondary discussion or debating a controversial point; please use chat instead;

When there are a lot of comments in a discussion, often a lot of them are migrated to chat. It happens, and comments shouldn't be re-posted back onto the question.

It's better than them being deleted outright.

albanx

what about asking permission before moving them?

wizzwizz4

@albanx Why should the site moderators need to?

They're not deleted, and only a link away.

Many comments are already a link away: the (show more comments) link.

And that would generate a lot of spam.

albanx

1:45 PM

there are a lot comments there why there are not moved

wizzwizz4

And it's sort of their job.

albanx

their job is to moderate

wizzwizz4

They were posted after the comment migration.

albanx

they can do what ever they want I really do not give a hack

wizzwizz4

@albanx I'm not allowed to quote moderator guidelines here (at least, I don't think I am, and I'm staying on the safe side), but this is part of moderation.

albanx

1:47 PM

Have you seen that new movie "Black Mirrow"?

wizzwizz4

@albanx No, but this chat room is supposed to be for discussion on the question.

It's supposed to be...

albanx

Yes but I have not finished

So , you see, I hope moderators are not like you!

wizzwizz4

@albanx You're making a point? Ok then.

@albanx Yeah. We've been termed the "fun police" in other chat rooms. :-(

But mostly as a joke.

albanx

it explains how people become sociopathicts to due technology and virtual social network

In the first episode for example

wizzwizz4

@albanx All moderator actions are logged and analysed.

albanx

1:53 PM

persons get excluded from social activities based on their "social likes" let say

I see the same situation on the current Question

wizzwizz4

If any moderator started behaving sociopathically, they'd be told off and / or cease to be a moderator.

@albanx Where?

albanx

that is why I posted that comment

by the way here is en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nosedive

wizzwizz4

@albanx But how does that scenario relate to this one?

This has been said several times, usually by people with gimme teh codez questions but sometimes by people with high rep.

I'd like to know why, because I don't understand.

ypercubeᵀᴹ

I see the title has been edited. From "I've killed my colleagues" to "I've killed my colleagues' characters "

wizzwizz4

@ypercubeᵀᴹ I think it was always "colleagues' characters".

ypercubeᵀᴹ

2:00 PM

Shouldn't it be "My character killed my colleagues' characters"?

wizzwizz4

Oh, wait. You're right.

ypercubeᵀᴹ

to be consistent

I don't think anyone would think that he killed the colleagues anyway. Even if someone did think that, not talking to him afterwards wouldn't be worrisome, and certainly not a surprise!

@wizzwizz4 I like the original title more.

Patta

@albanx I'm sorry, but your comments still sound like you call people childish for playing Pen&Paper games. You might want to make your real meaning more clear to avoid those comments beeing flagged. (To be honest I don't think that the comments are really helpful, but that is not for me alone to decide. If you think OP should abuse his coworkers beeing childish and think that this makes them easy to manipulate, you should post that as an answer.)

wizzwizz4

@ypercubeᵀᴹ It's a bit click-baity, and doesn't really explain the question.

ypercubeᵀᴹ

I don't know. I think it's fairly obvious - at least after a little bit of thinking

but it is click-baity - sure

Patta

2:07 PM

Funny side note: sharing the question via whatsapp leads to windows phone users only seeing the beginning of the title: "I've killed my colleagues"

2

But regarding the title I don't really think it is possible to explain the question any better, really.

albanx

@Patta I do not want to put an answer, that is not an answer, is just suggestion to the OP to not take seriously this situation, because is up to not serious person excluding him from social activities for a game

wizzwizz4

@albanx I really would like to know what makes you feel that way about moderators and SE moderation in general.

With a clear reason, something might be able to be done about it.

albanx

I do not feel nothing

I am like Vulcans, you know

:)

wizzwizz4

@albanx Ok, think that way. :-)

albanx

my comment about sociopathic was about the OP colleagues (related to the question)

wizzwizz4

2:16 PM

@albanx Oh. :-/

I thought that you were referring to the moderators who migrated the comments being sociopathic because of reputation and the not-face-to-face-ness of SE.

albanx

no no, not at all

Patta

@albanx Then you should put "don't take them seriously" as an answer :D But fine, I can see that. And to be honest I would expect such an answer to be downvoted. (I know I would probably downvote it, to be honest. No offense meant.)

albanx

That is why I do not put answer that goes in the oposite direction of the flow :), I know I will get only downvotes and blames

Erik

4:05 PM

The main problem with "do not take them seriously" is that these are colleagues. Whether you like it or not, you'll have to interact with them. It doesn't solve the OP's problem.

2

On RPG chat, the response "don't play with these people" is fairly common and usually not downvoted because in casual interactions, it makes sense. It doesn't work here.

And as some of the answers show, the OP likely isn't being excluded because of the game, but because he acted like a socially oblivious dick ;)

2

ypercubeᵀᴹ

4:29 PM

@Erik One could claim that the colleagues acted the same way as well.

Erik

I agree, I feel they should have said something when it started being uncomfortable for them. But they didn't, and OP might the mistake, so if he wants to fix it then it'll be on him.

Wrzlprmft

8:39 PM

"chaotic evil" (like a really evil guy for those with no D&D background – It was hinted at, but just for the protocol: Chaotic evil is not really evil. If that were the intention, it would actually be called really evil, very evil or similar. Very briefly, the distinction between lawful and chaotic characters is whether they make ethical decisions (in the broader sense) on a basis of rules, dogmas or similar (lawful) or on a per-case basis or intuition (chaotic).

The emperor from Star Wars – arguably one of the most evil characters in fiction – is pretty clearly lawful evil.

Transcript for

Discussion on question by Anon: I've …