Cobalt: either is fine! Cobalt: i don't know how busy you are Cobalt: however, i did just make some tea! Cobalt: so if you have time, would you like to have some tea with me at the pep dorms?
Please make yourself at home! You can sit at a desk or, um, the pillow fort. Getting a sensitIV kotatsu at some point is probably out, poor future is now...
Of all the things to have an apocalypse over. Gosh.
[Gonna bring over a cup of tea for Anubis and a plate of those Japanese soy sauce crackers for them to share, then sit himself down in the pillow fort, too.]
Anyway, thanks again for coming. Lately we've been talking a bit about changing our revival policy, and I kinda wanted to get your thoughts on it. I respect you a lot and I think that you understand where we're coming from better than most, so I would really like to hear your perspective, if that's okay...?
Yeah... thank you. I think maybe it would help just to be able to talk about it with you, even if you don't have anything to add.
[rubs the back of his neck]
We had two goals with our policy: one was to try and protect the community from rampant murder. The other was to protect members of pep!pep! from getting traumatized.
The policy that we announced was the best solution we could come up with from a strategic perspective. However, now that the dust has settled and we've all had a chance to cool our jets a bit... I don't know if any of us are actually mean enough to enforce it at all. And if we let an innocent person die, not only would we not be protecting the community, but we, ourselves, would we be totally devastated. So the policy would have failed on both counts, you know?
The change we're thinking about making is to strike the bit where we would withhold revivals from an entire unit. The idea would be that if someone does a murder, only that person would be responsible for the fee. It would theoretically still make it annoying to do murders, but people would only be responsible for themselves and not others.
Honestly, without the peer pressure, I don't realistically expect anyone to pay any fees at all. I think this change will probably make it easier to do murders, and that'll make it harder on both the community and pep!pep!. But at least pep!pep! would be able to revive more people without falling apart.
[draws his knees up to his chest.]
We know we can't stop people from killing each other, but the least we can do is try to keep it from being easy, right? But at the same time, we're not the police, and we don't want to be, either. It's hard to find the balance that'll help everyone the most and do the least amount of harm.
I dunno. After the live, you said we did the right thing. If we change it, is it still the right thing?
I think... that it's still the right thing. Your motives haven't changed. You're still striving for the same goals, and those goals are really admirable -- to protect everyone, without sacrificing yourselves.
[stares down into his cup of tea, carefully selecting his words.]
I don't know if withholding revivals from an entire unit was ever a good idea. I do't mean that as... criticism, necessarily, just that, well, there really weren't any good options, period. So it was worth a shot, but it definitely made people upset and uncomfortable. And since it looks like it might do the same for you guys, it makes sense to get rid of it.
Like you said, you're not the police. It's not your responsibility to keep people from murdering each other. It's really admirable that you do feel like you should be doing something, and I think that shows that you're all good people, but it's... it's ultimately not something you can prevent. I think if people really, really want to commit a murder, even enforcing the original policy wouldn't necessarily stop them. Maybe we can find options to discourage murder that don't put pressure on pep!pep! because they're not tied to revival...?
Admittedly, we were pretty upset when we made the first policy. It felt imperative to make our feelings on it as clear as possible before anything else had a chance to happen, because the first and second revivals that Pink did were only four days apart. And nobody we showed to policy to in advance seemed to have any immediate concerns, either, so we just ran with it.
I feel bad about it now, though.
And I'd definitely be open to other options. I'm sure the rest of my unit would, too. Because, like, we all kinda hate this.
We were all pretty shocked by what had happened, I think. It was a lot to deal with.
And... ugh, this is the part I hate, too. No matter how honest you are, there are people are going to be terrible about it. It's not fair that you got accused of extortion and making displays of power or whatever crap people were saying, but it happened.
I think the best way to deal with that is just for everyone to get to know pep!pep! better in general. Which I think maybe has started happening already? So... just be open about what your intentions are with revising the policy and the fact that you want other people to weigh in and I think it'll mostly be okay.
It really was a lot. pep!pep! was like a bunch of angry bees.
Most of the people in our unit are really outgoing, and have been since the beginning. That part hasn't changed. And we tried to make it clear during live that we were open to community input if anyone had any thoughts. We really are trying to be as open as possible, so we'll definitely keep doing that.
Do you think asking murderers to pay a fee if pep!pep! winds up reviving their victim is okay, or is that still bad?
So far, nobody has ever once charged anyone for a revival, even with the policy, and we would keep the rule where each person gets to choose the price they feel comfortable with, whether it's the fee we announced or nothing. Kind of like how sensitIV theoretically charges for healing, but each person decides for themself whether to do it or not.
I know you've tried to be open, and personally I think you've done a good job of it.
And I don't think asking the murderers to pay a fee is bad. It sounds good on paper, plus you know ahead of time that it's going to be hard to enforce.
I mean, to be clear, the idea is that if a person does a murder and doesn't pay the fee, we might not revive them in the future if they die. But that would only happen if, say, the person doing the revival asked for a fee in the first place, or if nobody else paid for them or something. Honestly, none of us want it to be difficult to revive people, but we do want to make murder at least sort of annoying and this is all we've got to work with.
Here. Take a look at the revisions and let me know if anything stands out to you?
[The notebook is already in the pillow fort because he was reviewing it before texting Anubis, so he'll hand him the revised policy.]
Everyone who already supported you will continue to, and I think it'll be a relief for those who were concerned about the old policy. I'm... not really sure I can predict some of my unit's reactions anymore, though.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
rollwillpowercheck) wrote2018-12-03 06:11 pm
Day 71
Cobalt: If you have some time, could I please get your advice?
no subject
hydrangea: do you want to talk via text or in person?
no subject
Cobalt: i don't know how busy you are
Cobalt: however, i did just make some tea!
Cobalt: so if you have time, would you like to have some tea with me at the pep dorms?
no subject
hydrangea: and that sounds great. I'll come over in like 10 minutes?
no subject
Cobalt: see you soon!
no subject
no subject
Hey! Thanks so much for coming!
no subject
It's no problem, really.
no subject
Do you like chamomile tea?
no subject
[finds a place to sit at the pillow fort.]
Yeah... sorry about the kotatsu. The furniture thing is ridiculous.
no subject
[Gonna bring over a cup of tea for Anubis and a plate of those Japanese soy sauce crackers for them to share, then sit himself down in the pillow fort, too.]
Anyway, thanks again for coming. Lately we've been talking a bit about changing our revival policy, and I kinda wanted to get your thoughts on it. I respect you a lot and I think that you understand where we're coming from better than most, so I would really like to hear your perspective, if that's okay...?
no subject
It's definitely okay. I... hope I can be helpful, since I know you guys have been having a really rough time.
no subject
Yeah... thank you. I think maybe it would help just to be able to talk about it with you, even if you don't have anything to add.
[rubs the back of his neck]
We had two goals with our policy: one was to try and protect the community from rampant murder. The other was to protect members of pep!pep! from getting traumatized.
The policy that we announced was the best solution we could come up with from a strategic perspective. However, now that the dust has settled and we've all had a chance to cool our jets a bit... I don't know if any of us are actually mean enough to enforce it at all. And if we let an innocent person die, not only would we not be protecting the community, but we, ourselves, would we be totally devastated. So the policy would have failed on both counts, you know?
The change we're thinking about making is to strike the bit where we would withhold revivals from an entire unit. The idea would be that if someone does a murder, only that person would be responsible for the fee. It would theoretically still make it annoying to do murders, but people would only be responsible for themselves and not others.
Honestly, without the peer pressure, I don't realistically expect anyone to pay any fees at all. I think this change will probably make it easier to do murders, and that'll make it harder on both the community and pep!pep!. But at least pep!pep! would be able to revive more people without falling apart.
[draws his knees up to his chest.]
We know we can't stop people from killing each other, but the least we can do is try to keep it from being easy, right? But at the same time, we're not the police, and we don't want to be, either. It's hard to find the balance that'll help everyone the most and do the least amount of harm.
I dunno. After the live, you said we did the right thing. If we change it, is it still the right thing?
no subject
[stares down into his cup of tea, carefully selecting his words.]
I don't know if withholding revivals from an entire unit was ever a good idea. I do't mean that as... criticism, necessarily, just that, well, there really weren't any good options, period. So it was worth a shot, but it definitely made people upset and uncomfortable. And since it looks like it might do the same for you guys, it makes sense to get rid of it.
Like you said, you're not the police. It's not your responsibility to keep people from murdering each other. It's really admirable that you do feel like you should be doing something, and I think that shows that you're all good people, but it's... it's ultimately not something you can prevent. I think if people really, really want to commit a murder, even enforcing the original policy wouldn't necessarily stop them. Maybe we can find options to discourage murder that don't put pressure on pep!pep! because they're not tied to revival...?
no subject
I feel bad about it now, though.
And I'd definitely be open to other options. I'm sure the rest of my unit would, too. Because, like, we all kinda hate this.
no subject
And... ugh, this is the part I hate, too. No matter how honest you are, there are people are going to be terrible about it. It's not fair that you got accused of extortion and making displays of power or whatever crap people were saying, but it happened.
I think the best way to deal with that is just for everyone to get to know pep!pep! better in general. Which I think maybe has started happening already? So... just be open about what your intentions are with revising the policy and the fact that you want other people to weigh in and I think it'll mostly be okay.
no subject
Most of the people in our unit are really outgoing, and have been since the beginning. That part hasn't changed. And we tried to make it clear during live that we were open to community input if anyone had any thoughts. We really are trying to be as open as possible, so we'll definitely keep doing that.
Do you think asking murderers to pay a fee if pep!pep! winds up reviving their victim is okay, or is that still bad?
So far, nobody has ever once charged anyone for a revival, even with the policy, and we would keep the rule where each person gets to choose the price they feel comfortable with, whether it's the fee we announced or nothing. Kind of like how sensitIV theoretically charges for healing, but each person decides for themself whether to do it or not.
no subject
I know you've tried to be open, and personally I think you've done a good job of it.
And I don't think asking the murderers to pay a fee is bad. It sounds good on paper, plus you know ahead of time that it's going to be hard to enforce.
no subject
Here. Take a look at the revisions and let me know if anything stands out to you?
[The notebook is already in the pillow fort because he was reviewing it before texting Anubis, so he'll hand him the revised policy.]
no subject
[shrugs. how to discourage murder when it seems obvious murder should be wrong?? we just don't know.
he takes the notebook and carefully looks it over.]
... I don't see anything that makes me hesitate. Hopefully this version will be a lot easier on you.
no subject
Thank you, seriously.
Do you think the rest of sensitIV would be okay with this change?
no subject
no subject
I heard about the last game. Are you guys doing alright?
no subject
... not really.
no subject
...If you feel like talking about it. And it's okay if you don't.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
1/2
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)