DarkwolfX37

Lunacy of Love: A CYOA Magical Girl Roleplay [Completed]

I am for the record working on a post it's just taking me a while. Sorry for that.

Myriad Reality

Myriad Reality

<Snipped quote by Meta>

Ah-- Oh my-- Okay, how can I convince you that I'm not? I have nothing to sell and, last time Yami talked to me, she said that you had even sent her. There was a big group text that I convinced Data to let me send and everything.

@Efficacy

<Snipped quote by Efficacy>

Tunnel: Oh, you want to talk to Yami? She can deal with you.
*Throws the phone at her face*

@Meta

Ow! Sis, that hurt!

Myriad Reality

where did everyone go?

@Stabby

Had to eat and get a hug cause I re-read some old stuff.

<Snipped quote by Stabby>

If the WayBack machine doesn't have it archived, it's lost. The only real hope is someone randomly showing up with the entire site archive, which won't happen.

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

Right now including our usual cast.

<Snipped quote by Stabby>

Had to disappear for a few minutes and I'm back, but may have to hop out of this convo eventually.

@Webmaster

If people don't vote for the sake of preserving your feelings rather than their actual opinion, I won't even need to vote in order for a "don't really care" vote to pass. At best there'd be a tie.

Myriad Reality

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

No, it reflects my sentiments, but not the whole of the concept.

It was made well before. If we had a full vote right now, I guarantee you you'd end up with fewer votes.

@Webmaster

"Right now" we're missing two people pretty much constantly.

Myriad Reality

<Snipped quote by Balance>

I have a different full stance but share the same sentiments.

@DarkwolfX37

1. Not my reasoning.
2. That was literally a discussion about you breaking the rules that already existed. You straight up broke the rule and tried to redefine it.

@Webmaster

1. It's almost word for word what you gave as your reasoning at the time. I had to say the same "you know you can just have characters be neutral, right?" speech to you and you even responded "I guess I can do that but I'd rather you not put me in a situation where I'd have to."
2. You only established it as a "rule" after I left, which was after the character was made. It's a discussion of you not getting to ramrod your personal feelings into MR just because you had one person agree with you and another passively support you. Even not counting me, if you want to pull a democracy bullshit, you've got 2, maybe 3 votes against whereas I can easily pull 3-4 who don't care and would be fine with it.

Myriad Reality

<Snipped quote by Webmaster>

At the minimum you can still go back and look at the last conversation on this subject instead of whining at each other like children.

also how about

because my apathetic mindset is active right now, and I am not your ally.

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

-_- if you're referencing me, I'm not actually hostile to you, I just want to see this actually go somewhere instead of watching two people consistently argue over a point without any form of compromise and the issue left unresolved/made worse.

In fact, I'm just gonna look this up on multiple points just so that you two can at least get this done and over with sooner. Because honestly, I actually want to know if I can make a homosexual female character without breaking the rules.

@Stabby

No, not you. Don't worry.

<Snipped quote by Webmaster>

Find nothing you say? I can at least find an earlier conversation about this same subject from two years ago.
roleplayerguild.com/posts/3097258

And I can respect a democracy, but frankly if there is a possibility of seeing that changed in a minor way, then I will try.

@Stabby

You found the exact post I was referencing. I'm impressed. I had only found... other things.

<Snipped quote by Webmaster>

At the minimum you can still go back and look at the last conversation on this subject instead of whining at each other like children.

also how about

because my apathetic mindset is active right now, and I am not your ally.

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

-_- if you're referencing me, I'm not actually hostile to you, I just want to see this actually go somewhere instead of watching two people consistently argue over a point without any form of compromise and the issue left unresolved/made worse.

In fact, I'm just gonna look this up on multiple points just so that you two can at least get this done and over with sooner. Because honestly, I actually want to know if I can make a homosexual female character without breaking the rules.

@Stabby

You can, just don't have her kissing a girl on camera or something like that. If they still can't think of a way to not endorse but also not vilify a homosexual with their characters two years later then that's their problems at this point.

i say no because religious convictions; some of my characters don't really have a reason to oppose homosexuality and therefore it would be out of character and unnatural for me to write them doing so, but if I did not write them doing so then I would be writing the support of homosexuality and, um, religious convictions sooooo

@Balance

That's exactly what I was saying. That is your reasoning and David's, the reasoning given two years ago when we decided on a "don't show/keep it vague" allowance.
But you know there's such a thing as "neutral," right? Just because they don't oppose something doesn't mean they approve of it or agree with it. Vagueness is your friend.

Myriad Reality

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>
went until you would for whatever reason suddenly stop replying for like a week at a time,

@Webmaster

Wow it's almost like two and a half of you are actively hostile to me whenever I try to keep you from overstepping your bounds and breaking the three fucking rules we established when we first talked OOC.

Myriad Reality

Main question to this whole argument on both sides.

Why don't you just go look up the original conversation and posts? (unless of course you can't, in which case it becomes obvious.)

@Stabby

Too lazy, mostly.

Myriad Reality

<Snipped quote by DarkwolfX37>

It really wasn't. You always go on about how bad your memory is.
That was absolutely never the agreement. Your memory is failing you.

No, there was a soft ban IC because it was established that there was literally no reason for anyone to be homosexual on an Existential scale. As for what you're going to "let me" do, you don't have the authority to do the exact thing you think you're trying to prevent me from doing. You've posted almost zero times in the past two to three years and you're trying to be the rule regulator, while I'm only enforcing the preexisting agreements that were already there.

@Webmaster

It absolutely was. You also claim to have a near-photographic memory but you've forgotten as much as I do.
It was. You can go fucking check.

There's literally no reason to be anything on an Existential scale. And it's not a matter of what authority I have, it's about your lack of it.
I'm also the only one who actually followed the original rules consistantly. You're the one who threw out the "no religion" rule as soon as you got someone to support it with Whiz. You're trying to enforce a rule that isn't how you claim it is, which is exactly why we only had three to begin with.