It's time (Option to Hide other players Glamour)

[Joven]

In the end it is just a discussion and for the most part people are being civil, however implausible the suggestion is if people are enaging with one another in a civil matter why does that bother you so much? As you said this idea probably will never happen so a discussion on a theoretical idea should really have no impact on you. Granted tone can be missed via text, just seems that you are irritated by this discussion for no real reason.

It's just the way people "argue" these days: "I don't like this so I make the claim that this topic is pointless and not worth the time to discuss".

[Theodric]

I'm just glad that the posters against the idea do an excellent job at keeping the thread at the top of the page and ensure that more people see it and leave a like on the original post.

On that note, as of the time of this post there's 101 likes!

[Jadedsins]

I'm just glad that the posters against the idea do an excellent job at keeping the thread at the top of the page and ensure that more people see it and leave a like on the original post.

On that note, as of the time of this post there's 101 likes!

We got to make sure everyone knows why they are wrong for wanting this.

[Joven]

We got to make sure everyone knows why they are wrong for wanting this.

How is it "wrong" to want an optional feature that doesn't harm anyone? If wanting something like this is wrong then why not go to the male Viera thread and tell them all that they are wrong for wanting something that not everyone wants. Since when are you the moral arbiter of what's wrong or right?

All the folks complaining about dudes in dresses, thongs and bunny outfits tend not to have a problem with all the bikini clad bunny, cat and lizard girls...Just sayin'

Except for the part where OP specifically said:

So now that we have female characters tanking in string bikini's...

Everyone only keeps bringing up the way guys can dress and ignore the rest because it make them appear to have a moral edge against implied "bigots".

[Arillyn]

How is it "wrong" to want an optional feature that doesn't harm anyone? If wanting something like this is wrong then why not go to the male Viera thread and tell them all that they are wrong for wanting something that not everyone wants. Since when are you the moral arbiter of what's wrong or right?



Except for the part where OP specifically said:

Everyone only keeps bringing up the way guys can dress and ignore the rest because it make them appear to have a moral edge against implied "bigots".

I have an alt I am leveling that is currently wearing the coliseum gear on her DOW. It's not glamoured - that is her gear. Bikini armor FTW!

[Theodric]

We got to make sure everyone knows why they are wrong for wanting this.

They're not wrong. Diversity of thought and diversity of opinion are invaluable concepts. The game already caters to many different types of players, many of whom never interact with each other. The proposed toggle only affects those who deliberately wish to go out of their way to force themselves on other players - which is a form of harassment.

There's been a lot of support for the proposal, regardless. A hundred likes is a pretty impressive feat - many threads do not reach such heights.

[Arillyn]

They're not wrong. Diversity of thought and diversity of opinion are invaluable. The game already caters to many different types of players, many of whom never interact with each other. The proposed toggle only affects those who deliberately wish to go out of their way to force themselves on other players - which is a form of harassment.

How is it a form of harassment to make glamours using the gear that SE has put in the game? I mean if someone wants to tank glamoured in the frog outfit idc - SE put it in the game. I have seen this a few times in this thread and I'm genuinely confused how this is seen as harassment.

[Vahlnir]

How is it a form of harassment to make glamours using the gear that SE has put in the game? I mean if someone wants to tank glamoured in the frog outfit idc - SE put it in the game. I have seen this a few times in this thread and I'm genuinely confused how this is seen as harassment.

Because it's not harassment. Period. Anyone claiming that people wearing what they want to wear in a video game is harassment is delusional at best.

[Theodric]

How is it a form of harassment to make glamours using the gear that SE has put in the game? I mean if someone wants to tank glamoured in the frog outfit idc - SE put it in the game. I have seen this a few times in this thread and I'm genuinely confused how this is seen as harassment.

It's a form of harassment for people to make controversial glamours and then force them on people who do not wish to see them - which is exactly what some of those opposed to the idea seem to want to do. If someone were to follow me around in-game in a frog suit simply to make a nuisance of themselves then I don't doubt that the GM's would intervene. That aside, branding people 'bigots' for not liking a particular type of fashion is also a type of harassment in itself - and a very troubling one, given that it devalues actual cases of bigotry.

[Vahlnir]

It's a form of harassment for people to make controversial glamours and then force them on people who do not wish to see them - which is exactly what some of those opposed to the idea seem to want to do. If someone were to follow me around in-game in a frog suit simply to make a nuisance of themselves then I don't doubt that the GM's would intervene. That aside, branding people 'bigots' for not liking a particular type of fashion is also a type of harassment in itself - and a very troubling one, given that it devalues actual cases of bigotry.

Following someone around with the sole intention of annoying them (which would be harassment) is not the same as wearing an outfit that some either like or dislike which comes down to personal preference...which is not harassment. I think you need to learn the difference.