Help me understand Character Centrism vs Player Centrism

[Seicher Rae]

2 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

I should not pick on people for tl/dr - I'm way too verbose myself.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about me.  I've been called out on my expository style at times. Pretty sure you have, too.  But yeah sometimes even with the threat of the pot calling the kettle black, some things are just waaaaaay over-written. I did give the OP props for use of spacing and white space.

[Tolya Ugajin]

7 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

Only when Xenu gives him permission.

Don't make fun.  I only engage in coitus on days the Flying Spaghetti Monster declares propitious.

[Seicher Rae]

14 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

You know, for the longest time this was always my knock on Tom Cruise - race car driver, secret agent, cocktail slinger, flyboy - all just Tom Cruise doing a different profession.  Then he did that samurai movie, and I was like, "Hey, Tom Cruise can actually play someone who is not Tom Cruise".

I only scanned the 10+ min. video, so maybe I missed it, but imho no one beats Sean Connery in this category. One of my characters favorites is Juan Sánchez-Villalobos Ramírez from Highlander... with the thick Scottish accent.  James Bond with a sword!

[Tolya Ugajin]

1 minute ago, Seicher Rae said:

I only scanned the 10+ min. video, so maybe I missed it, but imho no one beats Sean Connery in this category. One of my characters favorites is Juan Sánchez-Villalobos Ramírez from Highlander... with the thick Scottish accent.  James Bond with a sword!

You left out the part where he is supposedly EGYPTIAN with that accent!  Highlander, definitely one of my all time faves.

I just got done going through the video and what struck me the most is the irony of him starting off by saying there's sooooo much talent in Hollywood and then basically saying that all these top name movies stars don't really act.  So, basically there isn't much actual talent in Hollywood, writers just create Denzel or Bruce Willis characters.

[Beth Macbain]

23 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Don't make fun.  I only engage in coitus on days the Flying Spaghetti Monster declares propitious.

I, too, am a disciple of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, as well as ordination from the Universal Life Church AND the Church of Dudeism. 

The difference is that those churches don't demand millions of dollars in blackmail money to hide A-List actors sexual orientation to get rid of the tiny aliens inhabiting our bodies (ooooh... wonder what they're saying about COVID?) 

[Selene Gregoire]

46 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

You know, for the longest time this was always my knock on Tom Cruise - race car driver, secret agent, cocktail slinger, flyboy - all just Tom Cruise doing a different profession.  Then he did that samurai movie, and I was like, "Hey, Tom Cruise can actually play someone who is not Tom Cruise".

Cruise's biggest flaw is Scientology. Other than that, yeah. He sucked big time at playing Lestat. His only redeeming role is that of Captain Nathan Algren. Minority Report gets a pass since it was based on Philip K Dick's scifi short story, giving him  "manual" to study.

[Beth Macbain]

2 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Cruise's biggest flaw is Scientology.

It's for that reason that I will not watch any of his movies. I stopped when he went after Brooke Shields for taking medication for her postpartum depression. My resolve was further strengthened when I watch the Leah Remini series about it. Scientology isn't harmless... it's evil AF.

[Tolya Ugajin]

15 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

I, too, am a disciple of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, as well as ordination from the Universal Life Church AND the Church of Dudeism. 

The difference is that those churches don't demand millions of dollars in blackmail money to hide A-List actors sexual orientation to get rid of the tiny aliens inhabiting our bodies (ooooh... wonder what they're saying about COVID?) 

Gotta say, I was hugely disappointed in The Big Lebowski.  It had funny moments, but, all in all, just...dumb.  More gratuitous nudity would have helped.

[Beth Macbain]

2 minutes ago, Tolya Ugajin said:

Gotta say, I was hugely disappointed in The Big Lebowski.  It had funny moments, but, all in all, just...dumb.  More gratuitous nudity would have helped.

... gasps ...

And I thought being a Republican was your worst quality!

[Madelaine McMasters]

22 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

I, too, am a disciple of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, as well as ordination from the Universal Life Church AND the Church of Dudeism.

I was briefly amused by the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster until I saw a video of their participation in a parade. They were carrying signs denigrating quite a few religions. I lost interest after that and got my $30 ordination kit from Universal Life. I've been asked to perform a RL wedding this summer. If COVID-19 doesn't nix it, that'll be fun.

[Tolya Ugajin]

2 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

... gasps ...

And I thought being a Republican was your worst quality!

No I have far worse qualities than generally voting GOP (although not always, I voted Nader in 2004, and I have yet to vote for anyone named Trump).  You just haven't gotten to know me very well yet 😛

[Madelaine McMasters]

Just now, Tolya Ugajin said:

I voted Nader in 2004, and I have yet to vote for anyone named Trump😛

I might vote for Perot again. I know he's dead, but that looks like an advantage these days.

[Amina Sopwith]

You seem to understand the differences quite well. Now you just need to realise that not everyone plays on the same philosophy that you do, and that you can choose not to interact with those whose approach isn't compatible with yours.

[Tolya Ugajin]

14 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

I might vote for Perot again. I know he's dead, but that looks like an advantage these days.

Me too, and I agree.  In fact, the GOP tried it in 2016...

 

[Gopi Passiflora]

I'm pretty much a soft RP or a character-centric person in Second Life (the virtual world itself, not in the forums). In-world I avoid discussing some real life stuff like their "real" characteristics or mine. I may discuss real life current events but not very often. Any substantial discussions I have are usually related to business (like the sale of virtual products.)

Basically, I come to Second Life just to play around and have fun in my weird little way.

[xTornTwilightx]

12 hours ago, Amina Sopwith said:

You seem to understand the differences quite well. Now you just need to realise that not everyone plays on the same philosophy that you do, and that you can choose not to interact with those whose approach isn't compatible with yours.

Well the frustration comes from what to do with that information. I am doing better at picking up hints that I might have a different perspective and ending the conversation sooner or at least treating that person much more casually.

Here's a good example to prove the severity of the issue:

I decide to play a male character. I get into a serious relationship with a girl character. Some people would say I'm obligated to tell her I'm really a girl. Others would say If I'm representing myself as a male character I absolutely should not tell her about who I am in real life. Others would say that unless I exhibit concrete gender dysphoria then I should absolutely not be presenting myself as a male to other players, *especially* in a serious relationship. The last one might sound nice until you think about it for five seconds and realize it means that your real life *you* must be represented to your best ability in the appearance and mannerisms of your avatar.

You can sit back and play neutral in either a hippy or libertarian fashion and say things like "its whatever, just like, let people play the way they want" but ignoring the gravity of this doesn't make it go away. If you were very casual about SL then I'd give you a pass. But most of you are not. I feel like I'm bringing up an actual issue and some of you are treating me like the cause of the issue. And yes, it is "flawed' to think that you can play SL however you want without it impacting other players. Its a little difficult to put into words but player centrism can ruin the immersion of a character centrist player. However no one can "make" you not feel like a person sitting at a computer watching a chat. Every time I see a RL profile picture I want to call the cops. 

While writing this out I was reading what someone posted above who is too far away to quote and it looks like someone smarter than me has already figured this out so I'm going to go read that. I honestly don't know how this has not been implemented into the game already as some form of profile checkbox. 

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

1 hour ago, xTornTwilightx said:

You can sit back and play neutral in either a hippy or libertarian fashion and say things like "its whatever, just like, let people play the way they want" but ignoring the gravity of this doesn't make it go away. If you were very casual about SL then I'd give you a pass. But most of you are not. I feel like I'm bringing up an actual issue and some of you are treating me like the cause of the issue. And yes, it is "flawed' to think that you can play SL however you want without it impacting other players. Its a little difficult to put into words but player centrism can ruin the immersion of a character centrist player. However no one can "make" you not feel like a person sitting at a computer watching a chat. Every time I see a RL profile picture I want to call the cops.

The whole issue about revealing gender is complicated and there is no universally "right" answer. What one person needs (or thinks they need) will match with some and go against the needs/perceived needs of others. That is simply the way it is. Recognising this doesn't make us casual or any of the other more judgemental words you've thrown out. It just means we accept that not everyone uses SL the way we do.

Some of us value the remaining diversity of SL highly. Some of us miss how there used to be even more of it. A diversity of approaches makes for a richer and more self-sustaining world. Some of us want lots of different people doing lots of different things in lots of different ways because that means there's a niche for a greater number of people.

None of us are saying that you are the cause of this issue. We're pointing out that your rigidity is complicating things for you. Can you see the difference? You're saying things like "Every time I see a RL profile picture I want to call the cops." It's your responsibility to address this, not ours. Not anyone who has a RL profile picture, especially those who are using it to tell others that they're bringing their RL selves into SL. Can you not just think "oh, not someone for me" and move on?

If you have very stringent criteria, it's up to you to make that known and seek out environments where your requirements are more likely to be met. That means much of the grid won't suit you. Much of the grid doesn't suit me at the moment. So I minimise the time I spend in situations which frustrate me and focus on the people, places and activities which make me happy.

You're determined to use SL in a very particular and narrow way. Why complicate it even further by getting upset with others who don't do it exactly as you want? Acceptance of others makes it a whole lot easier.

[Maitimo]

3 hours ago, xTornTwilightx said:

Here's a good example to prove the severity of the issue:

I decide to play a male character. I get into a serious relationship with a girl character. Some people would say I'm obligated to tell her I'm really a girl. Others would say If I'm representing myself as a male character I absolutely should not tell her about who I am in real life. Others would say that unless I exhibit concrete gender dysphoria then I should absolutely not be presenting myself as a male to other players, *especially* in a serious relationship. The last one might sound nice until you think about it for five seconds and realize it means that your real life *you* must be represented to your best ability in the appearance and mannerisms of your avatar.

The crux of the matter is the one that I've bolded above. Maybe the real answer is that if you're using SL as soft RP or hard RP, you're better off not getting into any serious non-RP relationships at all. However, emotional connections are unpredictable and can happen without warning. 

If you with your male character are taking the soft RP approach, and the owner of the girl character is doing the same, then it likely doesn't matter, and she probably wouldn't need you to disclose your RL gender. Likely she would not mind if you did disclose and revealed that your RL gender is different. However, if she is "No-RP", then she almost certainly would want/need to know details about who you are in RL, including your gender and age, and be sure that these things meet her expectations, in order to feel safe and secure. It's really only ever the "No-RP" people who need to know these things anyway.

There isn't any "one size fits all" rule here; you can't say that everyone should always disclose or everyone should never disclose, or everyone should only have an avatar of their real gender, because there are as many people who don't care as there are people who do.  And even as an individual, it's not dependent on your opinions, it's dependent upon the opinions of the person you're getting involved with. If they need you to disclose, then you need to decide whether to disclose, or lie, or break off the relationship. Whichever option you choose in this particular instance isn't necessarily the same one that you'll choose next time, because the next person you meet may approach SL differently.

The important thing is to discuss, early on, whether the other person approaches SL with the same mindset as you do. From this information you can make a better-informed decision on whether to disclose or not. If she has a very different approach from yours, the relationship is almost certainly doomed from the outset anyway.

Edited March 28, 2020 by Matty Luminos

[LilithServil]

I've been lurking in this thread for a while and I'm kind of baffled by the OP's way of thinking. Apparently their way of playing SL is right and everyone else who  doesn't follow their rigid guidelines is "wrong", in their eyes.

Like, riddle me this: I state in my profile I don't do rp here and whenever you're talking to me, you're talking to me and not a character, regardless of what avatar I'm presenting myself with. You're not going to get any different responses when I'm wearing a feral fox, dragon, or deer avatar than you would if I were wearing one of my plethora of furry avatars because I'm not playing any kind of character, I'm just using the avatar to represent me in this virtual space. So why is that "wrong"?

I don't see what the big deal is that some people, using myself as an example, like to use SL to find people to hang out and chat with, and to possibly take the friendship outside of SL if we get along well enough-- say, exchange steam or battle.net IDs and play games together outside of the platform-- that has nothing to do with the example you used of a pervy user wanting to cyber, lol.

And that's not to say I avoid people who soft rp, either. I don't demand people tell me all of their personal info. If it comes out naturally in convo, then great! If it doesn't, that's also fine! But at the end of the day, if they're not someone who is going to tolerate me talking about RL stuff every now and then (i.e "so this happened to me today [irl]" or "I just got this new game on steam and I've been having a blast, sorry I haven't been on much", etc) they're probably not someone who's going to get along with me.

I don't really get the issue with having multiple ways of presenting yourself through different avatars either. Not everyone views them as either a clear-cut representation of themselves or a representation of a character. A LOT of my avatars are based off of characters I have that I draw, I just don't rp them. I use them as a visual representation of my space in the world-- they're "me" in a figurative sense but not literal. I kind of see them as just another art form, as I do texture work in my spare time and love the feeling of getting to represent myself via my own art. Kind of like how some artists might use their own artwork as a profile picture elsewhere. I don't see how that kind of thing is "nefarious".

I'm legitimately curious where OP's beef with people who don't rp comes from.

[Mollymews]

On 3/28/2020 at 5:51 AM, Orfeu Miles said:

The terms us oldbies always used were Immersionists and Augmentationists

https://gwynethllewelyn.net/2009/01/10/post-immersionism/

wooo! haven't seen those descriptors used in ages. I remember the debates from those days. Some of them got pretty ferocious at times

and Gwyneth, there is a name from ages past.  I loved Gwyneth's blog back in those days

[Orfeu Miles]

2 hours ago, Mollymews said:

wooo! haven't seen those descriptors used in ages. I remember the debates from those days. Some of them got pretty ferocious at times

and Gwyneth, there is a name from ages past.  I loved Gwyneth's blog back in those days

Yeah, when I first joined Sl 13 years ago, I used to regularly attend a philosophy group called "Thinkers", we would debate this Immersionist/Augmentationist thing endlessly.
The only thing I learned was that if there 50,000 people logged on, there were 50,000 different interpretations of what it meant, and where you would draw the line.
Gwyneth's views were quite influenced by Bhuddist thinking, she pretty much rejected the idea of the "self".

I always liked the idea, " What lies behind the mask?--------    Another Mask! "

[Prokofy Neva]

On 3/26/2020 at 11:20 PM, xTornTwilightx said:

I'll start my doing my best with some definitions I've made up.

Hard RP - Everyone knows what this is. "What is this RL you speak of?" "Obama? never heard of them"

Soft RP - This is character centrism and the way I play. Yes i know who Obama is. Yes I might say afk. But outside of the necessary, I "am" my character. Here's a good example. Sometimes when I tell people "I'm central time zone" they say, "yeah but what country/state???" and this has always really made me angry. At first I thought it was purely a safety thing... like stop trying to find me creeper. But then I realized I was angry because they were trying to find out more about "me" and I want them to speak to my character. Its a little difficult for me to define Soft RP because to me its just such a normal and, dare i say, correct way to play. So lets moves on for a moment.

No RP - This is player centrism. It comes in a dozen flavors. I'll start with the most obvious, obnoxious, and baffling example. "Hey girl, I'm 6'3 IRL, you think thats hot?" This is someone projecting "themselves" into SL. Its so weird to a soft RP'r like me because like, wouldn't it be way better to make your character look like you then say, "Hey, notice how tall I am? Hot isn't it? Want to grab a drink?" Also why is this guy "himself" but I am my character? Ok sure, maybe he says the same thing to every first day Ruth but I doubt it. Anyway lets keep going.

So at this point you might be thinking, "Well duh, some people really like Hard RP and some people are noobs, whats your point?" So here's the point.

Being pervy and bothering people in SL with your IRL dimensions is just part of "No RP" play. Many people treat their "character" like their car irl. Sure, it represents them to a little extent, but not really. For example, one thing I've noticed older characters do is swap up their Avatars. Is it formal night? Time to be tall and skinny for that dress. Country night? Now they're short and thick for those shorts. Or maybe they don't customize at all. I've seen 8 year old accounts in starter avi's wearing the same freebie outfit from London City every day. It doesn't matter to them, just like a lot of people don't care one bit about what car they drive. The biggest indicator of a No RP player is a RL profile picture.

"Ok, so you came up with some definitions, who cares? Let everyone play SL however they want!"

Yes but it does cause problems. Here, lets have an example conversation:

Them: "You should come to this party and enter the contest, it'll be fun!"

Me: "Ok I'll go but I'm not going to enter the contest, I don't have anything to wear for it"

Them: "Haha well you can just go naked like me"

Me: "Oh dear, I'm a bit too shy to walk around naked in this game"

Them: "First of all, SL isn't a game, at worst you can call it an interactive chat experience but really its a whole world where people can live and be themselves, their true selves. Second, saying 'your uncomfortable about walking around naked' is a bit childish, you know its just pixels right? It doesn't matter? Are you trying to RP or something? Anyway there are sims to go RP in if you want, so lets go to the party"

Hopefully this illustrates it well enough, especially because I've had this type of conversation many times. This is what Character Centrism vs Player Centrism looks like, or Soft RP vs No RP. The wild part of it is we both feel like the other is "playing the game wrong" and also ruining our experience to some extent. Also I threw in the whole "in this game" part just to illustrate how I might commit "Player centrist" heresy. I dont say it often so please don't focus on that. 

There are so many other examples. I'll keep this G rated but I'll see people doing the *thing* and they'll be like, two feet away from each other. My first thought is "Are they seductively thrusting at each other?" and I have to remember, "Nope, they're just sex chatting." Another is when people say things like, "great job on your outfit! You should really change your face though!" and I'll get super mad about it. I'll be halfway into typing out, "who do you think you are?!" until I stop myself. A third thing is when I date people they almost want to spend every date where we met, where they know people in nearby chat, where they always hang out. (What, you mean people like to go experience new places and have specific experiences to remember the person they just met through? Does having a different environment and seeing that person in that setting help you learn more about a person? Nah, lets sit on the same barstools, what does it matter where our cars park anyway.)

This is a bit of a rant because I'm not sure there is a solution. I think I came to SL a bit late and now people are through the looking glass, so to speak. I feel like I'm in a bit of a small minority in the Soft RP group.  Maybe I should just learn to Hard RP and escape the problem completely. Anyway I really needed to type this out because its been driving me crazy but if you have any insight I'd love to hear it 😃

I learned something from what you outlined here, but I still can't get used to people who speak of themselves in the third person and also render commentary about their actions in italics as if they are in a novel. It's odd. I also don't know how they do it.

[Mollymews]

2 hours ago, Orfeu Miles said:

Yeah, when I first joined Sl 13 years ago, I used to regularly attend a philosophy group called "Thinkers", we would debate this Immersionist/Augmentationist thing endlessly.
The only thing I learned was that if there 50,000 people logged on, there were 50,000 different interpretations of what it meant, and where you would draw the line.
Gwyneth's views were quite influenced by Bhuddist thinking, she pretty much rejected the idea of the "self".

I always liked the idea, " What lies behind the mask?--------    Another Mask! "

Thinkers! Wooo again!!

used to be quite a few formal and informal groups and gatherings like this in those days. Was a quite big thing in SL once

Prokofy used to hold a weekly gathering at Sutherland Dam. The Mill House had a similar weekly. Ladies Who Lunch would organise weekly gatherings at different people's homes. Caledon the same with their Morning Teas. The Blarney Stone also had semi-regular newspaper and coffee mornings to discuss RL news events of the day  

there were lots of coffee houses of all kinds that catered for informal gatherings. Milk bars as well, I used to go quite often to the milk bar on Noob Island back in the day, sit in the booths and have a chat about everything and nothing special

Philosophy House also, where Friday would always get a sizeable crowd sitting on the ground and the tree stumps by the fire. Mostly uni students and faculty. Back then with the uni students it was pretty much always Kant this, Kant that, Kant understand a word they are saying. Interesting for me tho

for raw partisan political debates then Ahern WA. Could get pretty rugged at Ahern some days but other days it would be quite good when there were people who knew their stuff

and the not always serious. Like I used to be active in the Fake Doctors Association once. Fake consultations and prescribing fake drugs and fake treatments to fake patients with fake ailments. Which because all fake would be quite elaborately ingenious sometimes

am not sure what the state of all this is these days as since I have been back I don't get about much in SL as often as I used to when I played before. Altho I read on here that Scylla has recently got a informal group going inworld. Not sure what the activities are when the group meets but knowing Scylla from her writings, then am pretty sure the conversations would quickly get substantive when that is what people want to chat about

Belli too I hear has some informal groups and happenings forming among the residents who now live there. Not sure of the details of these either, but now and again somebody will mention a Belli happening on these forums

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

5 hours ago, Mollymews said:

and the not always serious. Like I used to be active in the Fake Doctors Association once. Fake consultations and prescribing fake drugs and fake treatments to fake patients with fake ailments. Which because all fake would be quite elaborately ingenious sometimes
 

that's the kind of madcap creativity i miss, like young children before we stifle their imaginations in the name of growing up

[Madelaine McMasters]

7 hours ago, Mollymews said:

Like I used to be active in the Fake Doctors Association once. Fake consultations and prescribing fake drugs and fake treatments to fake patients with fake ailments. Which because all fake would be quite elaborately ingenious sometimes

I can imagine how my participation in that association would go. Half of my afflictions would involve some body part starting on fire and half of the cures would involve the application of root beer. The rest would be just silly.

Edited March 30, 2020 by Madelaine McMasters