Yeah, that'd be really cool, actually.I have to agree with you to a certain perspective yeah, it isn’t the friendliest nor a great example.
I’d recommend taking away the ability to eat players but instead change it to a certain food type. It could be something like /eat cookie. A con to this would be players abusing it for inappropriate uses. This can be avoided by limiting certain commands like /eat <choice 1-4> or something relative to that level.
Overall, I agree with the suggestion- it can make players uncomfortable to a specific degree.
Seems to me like you're just misconstruing it.![]()
You can literally eat people.
That's not child friendly.
"Person 1 ate person 2"Seems to me like you're just misconstruing it.
I would have made a joke about you having a dirty mind or something, but I'll be honest - I probably thought about the same thing you did after you said it's not child friendly. But, yeah, it's not explicitly stating anything. It's an emote.
If I were to guess it was originally meant to be like one of those pop tart or cereal eating each other commercials. Although it still is pretty contriversional and if we do regain the same player base as before ,13-16 ,I wouldn't be surprised if people used it out of original context."Person 1 ate person 2"
It doesn't take a dirty mind to see what's wrong with that.
Yeah, I kinda feel like it's being misconstrued.I feel like I'm interpreting the eat emote in two different ways that are both wrong lmao. Like yeah there's the dirty part but I mean, who eats other humans? no ONE It's just odd
Well, since the triggered emote was removed for being controversial, then this one should be removed too. And I wasn't seeing it in a dirty way, I saw it in the literal, illegal way.why does it matter lmao. if you see it in a dirty way then you're probably able to handle that. doesn't hurt anyone.
i would have disagreed with that one as well; anything can be misconstrued. if somebody can't take words that appear on a screen in an online game which obviously don't have the intent to harm or offendWell, since the triggered emote was removed for being controversial, then this one should be removed too. And I wasn't seeing it in a dirty way, I saw it in the literal, illegal way.
It's not that it is controversial or misleading. The fact of the matter is people will use it in a inappropriate way. Can't avoid it. Removing it puts less work on staff. No need to put a lot of work on staff just for a emote.i would have disagreed with that one as well; anything can be misconstrued. if somebody can't take words that appear on a screen in an online game which obviously don't have the intent to harm or offend
Exactly. Putting this emote there is practically asking someone to use it in a wrong way.It's not that it is controversial or misleading. The fact of the matter is people will use it in a inappropriate way. Can't avoid it. Removing it puts less work on staff. No need to put a lot of work on staff just for a emote.
okay fair point, i guess it is just the struggle of censorshipIt's not that it is controversial or misleading. The fact of the matter is people will use it in a inappropriate way. Can't avoid it. Removing it puts less work on staff. No need to put a lot of work on staff just for a emote.
Not everyone every has that insight. Not everyone will be like hey it's a joke. Either way it will somehow be taken the wrong way and it's better to not allow the error unless it can be prevented. Therefore changing it to eats *insert fancy food* is a lot better as it won't be taken out of content.I see where the context comes into play, but eating someone is inappropriate? Really? It’s clearly a joke unless more context is added, which can then be punishable for being inappropriate. I have always thought of it as a joke, like when someone goes *nuzzles you OwO*. You have to really be digging at something to go, “damn, that’s inappropriate!”. I literally had no idea why people thought it was inappropriate until I sat and thought about it for a good five minutes.
Adding in the case of the “triggered emote”, that was a lot more serious, as people here struggle with mental disorders all the time and do have their quirks that trigger them. That one is understandable and I was on the fence about for a long time, and I still don’t really know where I stand. That entire case was mostly about how players felt taken aback by a safe place seemingly making a joke about mental disorders. This one is about the contextual nature which resides in the player. Sure, remove it if you don’t want people using it out of context, but you’re also removing it from people who use it to make their friends laugh.
I also gave a few thumbs up on some well constructed arguments that made me realize the context a bit more. Removing it is sort of pointless. It’s an emote that isn’t meant to cause harm or be inappropriate in any way whatsoever.
TL;DR: Take it with a grain of salt. If it’s taken out of context in any way that breaks the rules, staff can punish accordingly.
How much more context do you need? PZ promotes how child friendly it is, yet there's an emote which basically promotes cannibalism, which is illegal and ethically wrong in so many ways, if you take it the literal way, that is. If you take it the dirty way, however... Well, I'm sure you can figure that out.I see where the context comes into play, but eating someone is inappropriate? Really? It’s clearly a joke unless more context is added, which can then be punishable for being inappropriate.
I could say the same about the triggered emote.TL;DR: Take it with a grain of salt.