Existing players used to logging in with their character name and moo password must signup for a website account.
- hex 2m
- Tanin_Guest 23s [Welcome to Sindome]
- Wulf 5m
a Butako 2m https://i.imgur.com/GsU4a79.jpg
- Angeline 12s
- FluffyPuff 2m
- AdamBlue9000 17s Rolling 526d6 damage against both of us.
- PsycoticCone 45m
- Burgerwolf 1m PANCAKES
- Raven 55m I lost myself, in the dark charade.
- Crooknose 11s
- Soltan 4h
- Archangel212168 20s
- Pladdicus 8m uh
a Mench 3h Doing a bit of everything.
- Rillem 22m Make it personal.
- Vanashis 4h
- zxq 35s Tools: https://ansicolortool.neocities.org
- Yizhi 5s
And 23 more hiding and/or disguised
Sindomedome logo
a cyberpunk roleplaying game
banner art by Michal Lisowski
Connect to Sindome @ moo.sindome.org:5555 or just Play Now

EVIL @INVISERS OH NO

Login to post. Membership required.
Jump To
Newest Post
To quote a fellow player's view on this subject: "@INVISERS ARE FUCKIN WORTHLESS."

I, however, disagree with this view.  Now, why would you think @invisers are worthless?  They can be an asset to the MOO just as anyone else is.  The only way I see that one could become upset is, say..  someone ICly rips you off, or maybe they're calling you up and harassing you, or SICing you and acting like someone else..  you can tell, OOCly, if its really the person you're talking to, or who it is, or whatever.

Ain't that kinda..  not exactly fair?

My proposal is this:  Completely abolish the @who command.  Yeah it has its good uses.  Yeah it can help you find RP.  And yeah, I don't expect you guys to actually abolish it.  I'm just stating the other side of this argument.

It can help you find RP.  But remember it is solely an OOC tool.  Do not use it for IC purposes, and do not try to force others to do so for your personal IC benefit.

Heh.  Man, I'm in a rantin' mood today I guess.

By Aikao at Mar 2, 2004, 10:57 AM | 0
Preach on brotha.
By Johnny at Mar 2, 2004, 11:28 AM | 0
And @invisers are not hiding from RP.  They're hiding from twinks.  *grumbles*
By Aikao at Mar 2, 2004, 11:48 AM | 0
on the flipside of your opinionated coin.   if it's so ooc then why @invis?  

The only way I see that one could become upset is, say..  someone ICly rips you off, or maybe they're calling you up and harassing you, or SICing you and acting like someone else..  you can tell, OOCly, if its really the person you're talking to, or who it is, or whatever.

Ain't that kinda..  not exactly fair?

let me say again if it's ooc then this -really- shouldn't be a problem.


Do not use it for IC purposes, and do not try to force others to do so for your personal IC benefit.
 

yeah well I don't, and I hope this was not meant as an accusation cause that's how it was taken, you don't know my (or anybody's for that matter) intentions, or desires so please don't comment on them thank you.

:grits his teeth while typing  

I'm gonna just stop right here.

By Jotun at Mar 2, 2004, 2:45 PM | 0
*scratches his head*

I honestly don't know why this is such a sensitive issue.

By Aikao at Mar 3, 2004, 8:52 AM | 0
It's hard not to flip open you cell phone and start callin' your friend that just apeared on the @who four seconds ago, and wasn't there 11 seconds before, when you checked.  I think thats where the problem stems from, the ease with which your character can just up and call someone for no apparent reason, on a whim.  Sure it seems IC, but its really not.  I dont want to speak for anyone else,  but its hard for me to keep my character from being influenced by who is on the @who.  

In a game where information is valuable and can keep your character alive, It's hard not to use every bit of information you can get.   If @Who just showed the aliases of people on the OOC Channel, i'd be fine with that.  I /like/ knowing how many people are around, but I don't really want to know who exactly they are.  But whatever, maybe I'm the only one like this?

By Nemisis at Mar 3, 2004, 10:40 AM | 0
Even knowing their OOC alias is enough information to give someone away who's trying to IC avoid people though.

If I brought back the total count of people on, would that be a reasonable concession?

By Johnny at Mar 3, 2004, 10:46 AM | 0
Does @who distinguish between players and admins as far as the "Several are in the mix."?
By Hirononbu at Mar 3, 2004, 12:15 PM | 0
I like the whole knowing where people are.. But thats because it makes things easier.  My point was really that people go @invis, because they know @who can influence IC actions pretty easy.  
By Nemisis at Mar 3, 2004, 7:28 PM | 0
Indeed.

Though numbers could be nice, too I guess.  I mean, especially when we break that 34 mark, eh?  *snicker*

By Aikao at Mar 4, 2004, 12:00 PM | 0
so type 'who' instead of '@who'?

*mutters about replacing all the meat-controllers with code that doesn't twink out unless it is coded to twink out and then the robots take over and we can't have that…robots can't fuck with people...Assimov said so can't fuck with them at all. Hehehehe I saw the lights again...yes...the light....*

By Iga at Mar 26, 2004, 1:09 PM | 0

The @who command hasn't worked for me…for about I dunno a couple of weeks now. I thoroughly enjoy it and still manage to get myself knee-deep in shit on a regular basis. And if any of you coders dare fix it I'll kill you!

By ReeferMadness at Nov 9, 2004, 8:54 PM | 0
Lemme toss in my 200c.

If everyone were @invisible, then no one would know who is on and who isn't so there's no ability for @who to be misused, and you -still- get the benefits of knowing where the RP is - in the mix, topside …

By Jinkorei at Jan 4, 2005, 12:55 PM | 0
I think it should just have the number of players logged in, and the locations. Like, many in the mix, a few topside, one not in the city.
By Biohazard at Jan 4, 2005, 1:17 PM | 0
Jump To Oldest Post