[Poll] Rumors

[Kinaed]

I think I was a bit imprecise in my wording prior. Players can RPA to find the IC source of rumors.

When a player sets up a rumor, the player has to set the IC source, which is traceable with RPA and is required to make sense. Players may choose to place their own character's name in that source, or they may choose to place an NPC, group of NPCs, or anything else that makes IC sense for the rumor to have come from.

However, the crux of what I think people were asking for, and what I said no to, is that players cannot RPA to find the OOC source of a rumor just because they want to know who was OOCly responsible for setting up/spreading a rumor. For me, the issue is that players want OOC information about who is responsible for setting up a rumor because it offended them. As I don't support IC/OOC crossover, staff don't give out that information.

[Pixie]

Wait wait wait... you CAN RPA to identify the source of a rumor, it's just that sometimes the source isn't a character? That's totally reasonable. The impression I was under is that there was a blanket rule that you were not allowed to identify the source, period, named source or otherwise.

Pages of Pixie-angst null.

[Hansel]

I personally like the rumor system, I regret it's not used to spread important informations concerning the events happening in Lithmorre. Each mage and demons attack, each people dying, each pyring and lashing, each arrest could be rumored. That is thematic, and that is also needed to spread the information amongst players.

I would even prefer that rumors replace the IC board, since in the IC board, only the opinion of the transmitter is heared. In rumors, we could see that opinion, as the source of the rumor, and some other opinions.

I also believe that if the rumor system was more used to inform about events, it would be less used for personal attacks.

[Temi]

Wait wait wait... you CAN RPA to identify the source of a rumor, it's just that sometimes the source isn't a character? That's totally reasonable. The impression I was under is that there was a blanket rule that you were not allowed to identify the source, period, named source or otherwise.

Pages of Pixie-angst null.

Yes, RPA can be used to investigate the source of rumors, and I'll do rolls and base what you find out on the specified source of the rumor, which should be reasonable and possible given the rumor. And if you're framing someone for something or it isn't something anyone but you could be in a position to know, you should be the source.

However, RPA cannot be used to investigate the source of comments, since those are not ICly linked to the person who spread them and you can't specify the source on them, but I figure that's even more confused on just general what people are saying about it.

[Pixie]

Wait wait wait... you CAN RPA to identify the source of a rumor, it's just that sometimes the source isn't a character? That's totally reasonable. The impression I was under is that there was a blanket rule that you were not allowed to identify the source, period, named source or otherwise.

Pages of Pixie-angst null.

Yes, RPA can be used to investigate the source of rumors, and I'll do rolls and base what you find out on the specified source of the rumor, which should be reasonable and possible given the rumor. And if you're framing someone for something or it isn't something anyone but you could be in a position to know, you should be the source.

However, RPA cannot be used to investigate the source of comments, since those are not ICly linked to the person who spread them and you can't specify the source on them, but I figure that's even more confused on just general what people are saying about it.

That must be where the "blanket rule" mention came from -- comments, not rumors. I think with comments that's highly reasonable. Briefly aggravating when all you want most in this world is to brutally ruin someone's day for mildly inconveniencing yours, but not an unreasonable rule by any stretch, and certainly not unrealistic.