Stanford Tulpa Study looking for more participants
(if you're chosen they'll pay for travel and lodging!)

Poll: Are we over the line?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
It's too much, yeah, grow up a bit.
4 21.05%
3 15.79%
12 63.16%
Total 19 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

In-System Conversations vs Tag-Team - Posting a plea to
We have been instructed to appeal to the masses to clarify the interpretation of a rule by staff. Is this the you want? If so, then we will obey by all means, if not, then we're damaged but repairable.

(10-19-2019, 03:10 AM)Misha Wrote: 6) Scientists at Bear Industries have created a super resilient bear suit that is virtually indestructible, runs off unlimited clean energy cells, and is specifically designed to devastate death stars.

We just successfully demonstrated its awesome power by blowing up the moon.

[Ashley] That's no moon!

And Endor by accident.

[Bear] My bad, sorry, there was an ant in my suit and I flinched.

Consequently Bear was banished from the surface of the Earth and low orbit.

[Bear] I'm staying in an impossibly large ark that has a small issue of a red dragon running about, but nothing my suit can't handle. Just until Ashley subjugates the entirety of the Earth.

This was posted by Misha as part of the running gag of the game in question here.

Apparently we're troublemakers and breaking the forum rules even if we stand shoulder to shoulder and talk to you, the audience together.

This is how we think, this is how we post. If this is unwanted, cringey, or bannable offense and we continue, then we will eventually get banned or forced out because it's a poison pill to the bear system.

In this example, for which we are officially warned after a staff discussion and failed appeal, it is claimed that this quote above breaks forum rules.


Please keep internal conversations between you and your tulpa out of the chat and forums.

We feel the interpretation of this rule in this case is oppressive and excessive. However, we also understand that we've been warned by every staff member on the forum here and on discord at least once by now. So it's clear that we're too close to the line regardless of our best efforts to obey and still have fun.

Given this understanding and our own delicate feelings, we're going to have to keep it more professional here I suppose regardless.

Your staff has spoken.

Comments? Though you should really be commenting to your staff if you agree with us. We find it very disheartening but it's not just one staff member, consider this more for our thick-headed understanding.

But hey, if it's just us, I mean we're the troublemakers, then we're going to cool it. So we plea, help defend the Bear system you know and the interpretation of this rule or see a lot less of us around. It's definitely personal, we're here to love and laugh, to have fun and to share. I don't feel, after a year of time on, that we can be reformed at our level of activity. So we'll be crippled in terms of content generation in fear of being banned. We've been drama since day one, drama is then one of out traits.

With Love,
Bear System

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to

I don't mind at all, especially in Lounge. It's not unwanted, I like it. I don't think it's cringe, even if it is cringe that's not bannable in the slightest. 
The longer the back-and-forth goes, the more it feels like internal convo, though. 

I wish there was some handy-dandy guideline to differentiate internal conversation and tag-teaming...
- G
Jamie and two brothers.

"You are the messenger, not the message. You are just like everyone else."
No one else really does it but us, so, I don't know what that would mean.
1) If this is going on in Lounge or Forum Games and isn't disrupting flow of the thread (or being done in back-to-back posts by the same system) it's fine
2) Edit: I really gotta rewrite this? C'mon universe, I'm already late for something and I haven't eaten my food that's now cold, give me a break..
basically: Bear's system has gotten frick-tons of warnings and we want to make sure before any real action is taken against their account that the infractions can be very public/transparent and we have a chance to comment on them, because while they're a little weird Bear's system is still really important to in our opinion and it's not worth losing them over some minor rule "breaking"

and 3) I guess, that rule was made to prevent much more obnoxious conversations than the ones your system has - to be honest, no one has ever been as established and reasonable as your guys' system and even come close to breaking the rule, so in technicality what we have here is a rule not meant for people like you still applying to you, which it still makes sense to try and enforce for fairness' sake, but... it does still feel off. So we should clarify the rule by saying it doesn't apply to off-topic or PR threads (while same-system posts do still count as double-posting), because I honestly can see several current active members of the forum doing something like this and having it be warranted (and we haven't seen the type of people/posts it was made to stop in like 3-4 years anyway)

but yeah Bear's system has done nothing but good for the health of the forum and is being warned as frequently as heckin' Melian and Mistgod who we have written record from many members that they literally left because of them, whereas Bear's system is really the opposite, so please if this must go on then please document these warnings/rule infractions somehow, because I honestly believe they're not intending to break any and are actually strongly intending to avoid doing so, which means it's the forum's fault for not being clear enough on the rules

also edit: I wrote all that 'cus Bear's system has messaged us several times in the last year about being afraid to even continue posting because of all the warnings they get, I know it seemed like a lot just for this one topic but idk where else to say it
Hi I'm one of Lumi's tulpas! I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.
All of my posts should be read at a hundred miles per hour because that's probably how they were written
Please talk to me
I think that the conversations that Bear's system is doing isn't really what the in systems conversation rule is meant to target, and I don't find it annoying, so I don't think that the warning was justified in this situation. on the other hand, no matter how established or important someone is, they shouldn't be exempt from the rules. also, you should probably anonomise the poll if you want honest answers since there might be people who find it annoying, but don't want to start conflict
I have a tulpa named Miela (formerly known as Monika) who I love very much.

"People put quotes in their signatures, right?"
yeah I did say it's not right to enforce the rule only on certain people, which is why I said we should change/clarify it, because what Bear's system does is not really what was in mind for trying to stop (it's hard and also maybe rude to give examples of what it was supposed to stop, but we haven't seen it in years I think)
Hi I'm one of Lumi's tulpas! I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.
All of my posts should be read at a hundred miles per hour because that's probably how they were written
Please talk to me
(10-21-2019, 05:51 PM)Breloomancer Wrote: should probably anonomise the poll if you want honest answers since there might be people who find it annoying, but don't want to start conflict

I reported my own post to make it anonymous.

If we're annoying, then we don't even want to 'follow the rules, yet still be annoying.' The comment we got backed by a staff vote is a pretty clear message to us is it not?
Bear system was silly and entertaining in a silly game thread that people go to for entertainment? Oh, the horror.

I don't believe that this instance qualifies as a good example of in-system conversation because the statements are directed outward. Actors on a stage, even when notionally directing their speech toward one another, are actually speaking for the benefit of the audience in service of the overall production. This example is not a private conversation publically recorded. It would not have happened independently of audience interaction.

(10-21-2019, 04:02 PM)Bear Wrote: No one else really does it but us, so, I don't know what that would mean.

We've done dozens of joint posts. Ranger's system has as well. We aren't as entertaining as your system because Vesper wants us to stay stuffy professional. If we were working strictly based on my standards and values, we'd probably have been warned a few times by now.

(10-21-2019, 05:51 PM)Breloomancer Wrote: you should probably anonomise the poll if you want honest answers

I greatly prefer public polls. This is a time to stand up and be counted for what you believe.


I feel that the rule against in-system conversation is unnecessary because any in-system conversation that is actually a problem would need to violate another rule, such as the ones for keeping conversations appropriate to the area they are in, against disruptive discussion, or against repetitively causing disturbances or drama.

I petition the staff regarding the rule against in-system conversation to do one or more of the following:

*Rescind it altogether.

*Make it a chat only rule.

*Exempt Lounge, Forum Games, and a system's own progress report from it. The only necessary protection against excessive in-system conversation in PRs would be that, if the thread is not sufficiently about reporting progress, it loses it's place on the Progress Reports board.

*Revise the rule to explicitly address only excessive in-system conversation, to discourage overzealous mods from issuing warnings over harmless examples that are well-received by forum users.

Ember - Soulbonder, Female, 39 years old, from Georgia, USA . . . . [Our Progress Report] . . . . [How We Switch]
Vesper Dowrin - Insourced Soulbond from London, UK, Not a Tulpa, Female, born 9 Sep 1964, bonded ~12 May 2017
Iris Ravenlock - Insourced Soulbond from the Unseelie Court, Not a Tulpa, Female, born 6 Jun 1982, bonded ~5 Dec 2015

'Real isn't how you are made,' said the Skin Horse. 'It's a thing that happens to you.' - The Velveteen Rabbit
(Skipping colors) I didn't see anything wrong with what Bears posted and where, just the rule being a bit too broad. That rule needs an update if it's even gonna stay. In-system conversations seems to be quite a taboo for some reason which I think is weird. Sometimes those conversations just happens while writing and it should be encouraged to let them happen rather than discouraged. Even if it is discouraged with in-system conversations on the forums, I definitely don't think the rule should apply on game threads if not stated by the thread author.

and we already have this rule
Quote:Avoid disruptive discussion. Some silliness is okay, but it should not disrupt or drown out serious discussion. What is considered disruptive is up to moderator discretion.
and this
Quote:Keep conversations appropriate to the area they are in.
so without that in-system conversation rule, it wouldn't make much difference for Bear Co if their actions were considered disruptive or inappropriate.
Hi! I'm one of the most active fronters of our system, together with my headmates, Xar, Reisen, and Kurisu. I like timey wimey stuff and blue boxes. Make it timey wimey blue box stuff and we're set to explore all time, forum and space.
Our Journey(PR)
I think it's fine in Lounge, Forum Games, and PRs. I don't recall Bear system posting silly in-system chatter in serious discussion.
My tulpa Aya writes in this color.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)

Lolflash - click it, you know you want to