Change the rules for INI edits

Rubblemancer - Sanctuary

More character customization is good!

Tzaphion - Raging Tide

Ah, I've had four hours of sleep and I've been awake for about twenty~
I think I might as well add "doing something really stupid" to my list of today's accomplishments...
Therefore, Immina go say stuff on the forums I'll regret in the morning~

What right have we to judge others for their choices in respect to their character's appearance? There are no moral issues associated with editing ini files nor are there any moral issues tied in with fat pandas, huge breasted women, or bean poles. What harm do they cause? What harm do they endure?
Whether or not it is accepted by their peers, whether or not it is accepted by the moderators, won't this issue continue anyway?
As WingedXepher pretty much put it, he doesn't give a flying squirrel.

You know, it's funny how priorities are put aside for something as stupid as this.
Has anyone actually gotten banned for this before?
Yes.
My girlfriend in fact, got banned for it once, back in Beta.
She **** her character and made some tweaks to her bust line.
A moderator caught her.
Because at the time, moderators had best friends.
Moderators didn't really seem to care who these friends were.
One of these friends was a very, very rude, bad mouthed person who stalked her and said some very sexist, racist, and anti-semetic things to her.
We reported him.
And she was the one that got banned.

The only reason we're back is because we're tired of pay-to-play stuff, we heard that the moderation team got lazy, and we wanted to enjoy the Tideborn/Earthguard updates.
The population's really grown up since then.

Usually when we walked through town during the early days, people would send her some really nasty PMs.
"If I saw someone like that in real life, I'd shoot the b****"
"WTF, stop being g** dude"

**** people had gotten enough smack back then, and I'm happy to see that no one really seems to care anymore.
Heck, the other sections of Perfect World has already let that rule go.
Why the Perfect World International Moderation Team stands so strongly with this rule is far, far beyond me.

If I **** my character, who am I hurting?
Don't I have the right to look how I wish?
To suffer the consequences of my appearance?

And yet even if my words are meaningless.
Even if my entire post is skipped over...
People will keep doing it.
The numbers of the **** will continue to swell.

I vote yes for this.
I would vote again, and again, and again if I could.
So at the very least I could have a cleaner conscious when playing Perfect World.
So at the very least I have something nice to think about, something pleasant to say about my escape from the real world.

If anyone's read this far along this stupid, useless, wasteful post.
Please, don't let the efforts die.

Thank you.

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

So 22 pages of this thread, and about 72% support in favor of a rule change out of almost 300 people.

I think it's about time we draft some potential rules for what edits we want allowed.

Everyone has pretty much agreed they don't want extreme edits allowed(shame imo because I haven't seen anything behind this but shallow reasons)

So heres what the majority has seemed to agree on.

1. We want to be able to put any race's hairstyles, such as EG's and TB's, onto other classes/races.

2. We want to be able to modify our eye textures.

3. We want to be able to freely modify our skin and hair colors.

4. In accordance with the common idea, Body size INI edits would not be allowed.


As the rules stand now, these INI edits are not handled fairly. Some people are banned for harmless edits while others are left alone. GMs themselves can use advanced modifications. There is obviously no harm in the modifications we want to be able to do, and thus no necessity for this unjust enforcement that is in practice today.

Other versions of this game have allowed INI edits, and as far as we know, which in this subject is pretty far, there is no reason why these moderate edits shouldn't be allowed here.


Thats a general, very rough Idea for a draft. Please feel free to help me improve and refine it.

Tzaphion - Raging Tide

Shallow reasons are shallow~
If I came up with a somewhat deeper reason, or perchance a decent argument, perhaps we could make an amendment in favor of no real size restrictions? o.o;

Ahem, ahem~

First of all, I would like to say that all arguments made in the effort to support size restrictions are bad arguments, as they all seem to follow the same general fallacy, which is the Appeal to Ridicule fallacy, in which ridicule and mockery are used as substitutes for actual evidence.

Their arguments, as far as I've been able to comprehend on a shallowing pool of sleep hours, is as follows...

1. Normal sizes are normal.
2. Normallity is generally accepted.
3. Anything that is abnormal is not accepted.
4. Anything that is not accepted is usually viewed as ugly.
5. Abnormal sizes are are not normal.
6. Abnormal sizes are ugly.
7. Ugly things should not be allowed as the ideas of what is normal is widely accepted among a huge portion of our peers.
Therefore, Abnormal sizes should not be allowed because a whole bunch of people think that abnormal sizes are ugly, and you would be making an ugly character.

Just because a whole lot of people think its ugly doesn't mean it should be shot, yeah?
Don't stab the sad platypus, or the three legged zebra.

Here's the argument that I would like to present for abnormal sizes~

1. We all have different perspectives
2. Perspectives are often used to judge others
3. We are no more perfect than the next person
4. Ideas can not be more perfect than their creators
5. Being imperfect beings we can only come up with imperfect ideas
6. There is no perfect or universally accepted standard of beauty.
7. Video games were created to kill time and have fun.
Therefore, abnormal sizes should be allowed because they are not universally ugly to everyone and quite frankly some people may enjoy and have fun with their disporpotions and as a game abnormal body sizes would further assist Perfect World in fulfilling its functions, as a game, to instill fun and kill time.

Unless someone wants to argue that God exists and he is not a deceiver, and God placed an idea of the perfect standard of beauty in our minds, and we know that we have a perfect standard of beauty in our minds because we have clear and distinct ideas, and we know that we have distinct ideas because God exists and he is not a deceiver, and we know that God exists and he is not a deceiver because we have an idea of a perfect being and an idea cannot either be as perfect or less perfect than their origin, and we know we have an idea of a perfect being (God) because we have clear and distinct ideas, and we know that we have clear and distinct ideas because God exists and he is not a deceiver, and so on, I think I have made a not-so-shallow argument! : D

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

Yes unfortunately, as a general rule, people tend to find more plain looking things more attractive.

And the reason my little draft forbids "abnormal" size edits is because thats what the majority seems to agree on.

I did ask a few times for a logical reason why "unnatractive" ini mods shouldn't be allowed, and of course since there is no logical reason I didn't get one.

But since this is what the majority thinks, to avoid diverting off from our common goal with this argument, I included that as a potential rule.

Tzaphion - Raging Tide

Aww, snapple jacks gosh dern it! D;<

What if I were to question the validity of the argument presented by the people in this thread regarding beauty as this is an attempt to make an inductive argument and this thread does not contain a large, representative sample of the entirety of the Perfect World population, and whether or not there is or is not bias is unknown as we don't appear to have clear enough numbers that distinguish male from female and ini editor from non ini editor? o.o

... I think I just accidentally invalidated this thread, if I did, ignore the above

But seriously, who's a fat panda gonna hurt, huh? ^^;
The same crowd as a regular panda, that's for sure.
And don't get me started on those gosh dern hammers

... If I didn't invalidate this thread, then I'm very happy I didn't summon the angry ghost of David Hume.

If I want to be ugly, and people are antsy about it, does that truly relinquish my right to look however I want?

~Edit : And furthermore, what if you just go along with what I'm saying and we just keep it between you and me. No one got's t'know, yeah? :>

Waterfal - Sanctuary

grr.. suggestion box... >.>"

It's a shame that frankie won't give us any counter arguments. I highly doubt he's even reading this at all...

grimreaperhc

I voted against >:(

I know that most people would use it to add more customization to their chars and make them beautiful, but the thought that some sick **** will use it to make their chars look like devils taken from the core of hell after being tortured for 5000 years doesn't sound good to me, sorry :C

Waterfal - Sanctuary

No nomming my tail anymore for you >:|

b:avoid b:chuckle

krittycat

Tzaphion - Raging Tide wrote: »

Shallow reasons are shallow~
If I came up with a somewhat deeper reason, or perchance a decent argument, perhaps we could make an amendment in favor of no real size restrictions? o.o;

Ahem, ahem~

First of all, I would like to say that all arguments made in the effort to support size restrictions are bad arguments, as they all seem to follow the same general fallacy, which is the Appeal to Ridicule fallacy, in which ridicule and mockery are used as substitutes for actual evidence.

Their arguments, as far as I've been able to comprehend on a shallowing pool of sleep hours, is as follows...

1. Normal sizes are normal.
2. Normallity is generally accepted.
3. Anything that is abnormal is not accepted.
4. Anything that is not accepted is usually viewed as ugly.
5. Abnormal sizes are are not normal.
6. Abnormal sizes are ugly.
7. Ugly things should not be allowed as the ideas of what is normal is widely accepted among a huge portion of our peers.
Therefore, Abnormal sizes should not be allowed because a whole bunch of people think that abnormal sizes are ugly, and you would be making an ugly character.

Just because a whole lot of people think its ugly doesn't mean it should be shot, yeah?
Don't stab the sad platypus, or the three legged zebra.

Here's the argument that I would like to present for abnormal sizes~

1. We all have different perspectives
2. Perspectives are often used to judge others
3. We are no more perfect than the next person
4. Ideas can not be more perfect than their creators
5. Being imperfect beings we can only come up with imperfect ideas
6. There is no perfect or universally accepted standard of beauty.
7. Video games were created to kill time and have fun.
Therefore, abnormal sizes should be allowed because they are not universally ugly to everyone and quite frankly some people may enjoy and have fun with their disporpotions and as a game abnormal body sizes would further assist Perfect World in fulfilling its functions, as a game, to instill fun and kill time.

Unless someone wants to argue that God exists and he is not a deceiver, and God placed an idea of the perfect standard of beauty in our minds, and we know that we have a perfect standard of beauty in our minds because we have clear and distinct ideas, and we know that we have distinct ideas because God exists and he is not a deceiver, and we know that God exists and he is not a deceiver because we have an idea of a perfect being and an idea cannot either be as perfect or less perfect than their origin, and we know we have an idea of a perfect being (God) because we have clear and distinct ideas, and we know that we have clear and distinct ideas because God exists and he is not a deceiver, and so on, I think I have made a not-so-shallow argument! : D

Size of the character can have a HUGE effect on TW and PvP. If size edits were allowed, stick-thin figures could be created, which would be harder to see in a battle situation. Therefore, to avoid issues on that side of the size spectrum, size edits would have to be disallowed (if this ever came to fruition).

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

GrimReaperHC wrote: »

I voted against >:(

I know that most people would use it to add more customization to their chars and make them beautiful, but the thought that some sick **** will use it to make their chars look like devils taken from the core of hell after being tortured for 5000 years doesn't sound good to me, sorry :C

But grim how could you

you can make a char look like it came from the core of hell without ini edits.
What we propose would just allow more hairstyles, eye texture and colors.

see previous posts for proof >:D that I can make hellish chars without ini edits.

Anyway, I'd really like some input on my draft and some help. I suck at this kind of stuff and I need your guys's help >.> to improve it and make it as detailed and inclusive as I can so that it comes out to be something legit that the people in charge can take seriously and actually consider changing the current rules.

grimreaperhc

_blood_rain - Sanctuary wrote: »

But grim how could you

you can make a char look like it came from the core of hell without ini edits.
What we propose would just allow more hairstyles, eye texture and colors.

see previous posts for proof >:D that I can make hellish chars without ini edits.

b:shocked

I`ll block you if your archer looks the same way >:(

krittycat

_blood_rain - Sanctuary wrote: »

see previous posts for proof >:D that I can make hellish chars without ini edits.

*shudders*

b:sweat

She speaks the truth... I am forever mentally scarred from those images.b:infuriated

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

GrimReaperHC wrote: »

b:shocked

I`ll block you if your archer looks the same way >:(

Don't worry I wont do that to my sexy molestable archer >.>

but you do see my point right?

My regulation draft is also a few posts back, and I've been asking for help to improve it and that has just gone over everyone's heads.

But it calls for allowance of small edits: hair, eye texture, hair and skin color.

It specifically goes against crazy body edits, because that was what the general population said they didn't want.

Vinat - Sanctuary

_blood_rain - Sanctuary wrote: »

So 22 pages of this thread, and about 72% support in favor of a rule change out of almost 300 people.

I think it's about time we draft some potential rules for what edits we want allowed.

Everyone has pretty much agreed they don't want extreme edits allowed(shame imo because I haven't seen anything behind this but shallow reasons)

So heres what the majority has seemed to agree on.

1. We want to be able to put any race's hairstyles, such as EG's and TB's, onto other classes/races.

2. We want to be able to modify our eye textures.

3. We want to be able to freely modify our skin and hair and eye and lip and eye makeup colors.

4. In accordance with the common idea, Body size INI edits would not be allowed.


As the rules stand now, these INI edits are not handled fairly. Some people are banned for harmless edits while others are left alone. GMs themselves can use advanced modifications. There is obviously no harm in the modifications we want to be able to do, and thus no necessity for this unjust enforcement that is in practice today.

Other versions of this game have allowed INI edits, and as far as we know, which in this subject is pretty far, there is no reason why these moderate edits shouldn't be allowed here.


Thats a general, very rough Idea for a draft. Please feel free to help me improve and refine it.

I added a few things in =o

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

Thank youuuuuu

I need all the contribution and reworking I can get to make this a respectable piece of writing

grimreaperhc

_blood_rain - Sanctuary wrote: »

Don't worry I wont do that to my sexy molestable archer >.>

Now when you mentioned molesting, please step into my office ... b:sin

But yea, I guess that if the GMs allow players to do that we will be happy ... but I dunno, don't want to see some freaks around Dx

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

GrimReaperHC wrote: »

Now when you mentioned molesting, please step into my office ... b:sin

But yea, I guess that if the GMs allow players to do that we will be happy ... but I dunno, don't want to see some freaks around Dx

-.- have I not proven that freaks can be created without the assistance of INI edits.

Also, here are the proposed rules in case you havent seen them already

1. We want to be able to put any race's hairstyles, such as that of EG's and TB's, onto any other classes/races.

2. We want to be able to modify our eye textures.

3. We want to be able to freely modify our skin, eye, eyebrow, lip, and eye makeup colors using any dimensions of the colors given on the full spectrum.

4. In accordance with the common idea, body size INI edits would not be allowed as they have the potential to be abusive.


As the current rules stand, these harmless INI edits are not handled justly. Some people are banned for harmless edits while others are left alone. GMs themselves can use advanced modifications. There is obviously no harm in the modifications we want to be able to do, and thus no necessity for this unjust enforcement that is in practice today.

If, hypothetically, the GMs were to start equally banning every player who used an INI edit on their game characters, quite a large percentage of the game's population(paying customers) would be banned. The current rules against INI edits are simply inappropriate and unenforceable.

Other versions of this game have allowed INI edits; and as far as we know, which in this subject is pretty far, there is no reason why these moderate edits listed shouldn't be allowed here.

We would directly disallow Body size edits, to minimize the cases of these "freaks", but as you can see, "freaks" still exist INI edits or not. INI edits are irrelevant in the matter of the existence of "freaks" so you would have the chance to see some abominations anyway even if these weren't implemented.

Bellarie - Raging Tide

Wow. Grim and Kritty, thank you. It's good to see we are finally having an effect, our voices are finally being heard. Now we just have to cut through a bunch of red tape and get this pushed through.

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

What do you think of the proposed rule draft thingy? anything you could add to it to make it more clear and accurate?

truekossy

Popping in simply to add my support for this. I'll read over the rules and all that later to see what help, if any, I can give.

krittycat

_blood_rain - Sanctuary wrote: »

It specifically goes against crazy body edits, because that was what the general population said they didn't want.

_blood_rain - Sanctuary wrote: »

We would directly disallow Body size edits, to minimize the cases of these "freaks", but as you can see, "freaks" still exist INI edits or not. INI edits are irrelevant in the matter of the existence of "freaks" so you would have the chance to see some abominations anyway even if these weren't implemented.

Was my example not good enough for you to stop saying it was simply "what the people want"?b:sad

hydrolace

GrimReaperHC wrote: »

I voted against >:(

I know that most people would use it to add more customization to their chars and make them beautiful, but the thought that some sick **** will use it to make their chars look like devils taken from the core of hell after being tortured for 5000 years doesn't sound good to me, sorry :C

( Forgive me for pointing you out, but i'm going to use you as an example. )

What I quoted seems like a very steriotypical response. What you see as beautiful and I see as beautiful could be different. Someone may like a character like that. It's rude to say 'well I don't think its purteh so you can not haz do it!'

You're friends with Tearle right? (she mentioned you a few times). Have you seen her veno? The one with the chibi look? She's been whispered hateful things because of its wide eyes.

"Your character looks like a ****ing alien."
"why'd your ruin a good veno?"
"that is an ugly *** char thu"
"you look like a ch***" <---seriously? Use a racial slur?

Are just a few of what she's told me.

I mean really, does someone's character design bother people THAT much?
If it does, don't click on them, close the other char window and turn off customs til they're gone.

People need to grow up.
Customizations should be allowed because it would help diversify our characters and honestly, what does a few facial mods hurt?

Lesthar - Heavens Tear

^
As you said rightfully, every taste is in nature, what some can find ugly, others will find funny and beautiful...

I have my preferences, but yeah, I cannot say anything besides the fact that some create characters not because it's supposed to represent their ideal but for shock value.

And...uhhhh... I guess I reached a dead end. I will come back around when I have the conclusion for this train of thought.

Psytrac - Dreamweaver

Vinat - Sanctuary wrote: »

Personally I don't care to see blue or green skinned toons *snip*
Also.. I am relatively disappointed that this was moved to the suggestions box. I guess the GMs told the mods to make this thread die.

my sin is blue.. so is my Psy.. (psy is default color) That's what looked best to me lol

WingedXepher - Dreamweaver

I want Earthguard eyes and Hair on my normal toons, that's all.

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

KrittyCat wrote: »

Was my example not good enough for you to stop saying it was simply "what the people want"?b:sad

No the stick edits thing is perfectly valid, but my original idea was just to make that edit in and of itself bannable...

Just how tiger form for barbs isn't on the whole bannable, but glitching claws with tiger form is in and of itself bannable: aka ban the specific harmful act.

But the thought has occured to me that, to simplify the matter, it is probably better to set the boundary at size INI edits anyway. I did revise my wording of the rule pertaining to body edits to reflect the stick figure edits(or at least I think I did maybe I forgot I'll have to go check).

As the current rules stand, harmless INI edits are not handled justly. Some people are banned for benign modifications, while others are left alone. GMs themselves can use advanced modifications. There is obviously no harm in the modifications we want to be able to do, and thus no necessity for this unjust enforcement that is in practice today.

If, hypothetically, the GMs were to start equally banning every player who used an INI edit on their game characters, then quite a large percentage of the game's population(paying customers) would be banned. The current rules against INI edits are simply inappropriate and unenforceable.

Other versions of this game have allowed INI edits; and as far as we know, which in this subject is pretty far, there is no reason why the moderate edits listed shouldn't be allowed here.


1. We want to be able to put any race's hairstyles, such as that of EG's and TB's, onto any other classes/races.

2. We want to be able to modify our eye textures.

3. We want to be able to freely modify our skin, eye, eyebrow, lip, and eye makeup colors using any dimensions of the colors given on the full spectrum.

4. In accordance with the common idea, body size INI edits would not be allowed as they have the potential to be abusive.

That's my entire little Bill of INI Edit Rights, I really don't know what else to call it >.>
lol and I did edit the wording of the one regarding body size. Also changed it around just a little, still wanting more people to point out any mistakes I made or clarifications I should make.

Kohai - Lost City

Is it allowed to use TB or EG Hair on other classes? If not what are the consequences?

Kyna - Lost City

I suggested something much like this except that the rules were much more clear... at least I think so anyway. Wouldn't involve ini hacking but rather, an actual change.

Which makes it doubtful to happen since PWI devs are so... stupid... and *** backwards.

You can find my suggestion here. http://pwi-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=1019671

_blood_rain - Sanctuary

Kohai - Lost City wrote: »

Is it allowed to use TB or EG Hair on other classes? If not what are the consequences?

We are currently not allowed to use EG and TB hair on other races. The consequences, however, are always inconsistent. Some people get left alone and others get banned almost immediately.

...Part of the reason why we'd like these changes.

@ Kyna:
Your older suggestion isn't much like this as it doesn't have to do with unjust and unequal enforcement of rules, allowing INI Edits, or rule changes.
It would be much simpler to have a rule change made than to actually ask the devs to create something for us like this. You know they never would. They gave us a re-skin of an old mount to compensate for major obstruction to obtaining r9 ffs. I highly doubt they would ever genuinely actually create something just for us.

And INI edits are already allowed in just about every other version of PW, making me question the reasoning behind it still being illegal here. It would be much simpler to just change the rules than to ask for anyone to actually get up and DO something.