2010-10-11 22:34:29 note card
Meeting Summary: Magistrate Course - Week 6 (OOC/IC Issues & Moderation)
Instructor: Janette Inglewood (High Magistrate of Olni, Moderator)
Participants:
Leshil Jierdon
Rayah Marenwolf
Charles Esharham
Desiree Paneer
Nadhirrah Nyoki (joined late)
Calon Yoshikawa (joined late)
Xavier Wrexan (joined late)
VolmarrGoth Vollmar (joined late)
Meeting Summary:
Janette Inglewood led Week 6 of the Magistrate course, focusing on the crucial and often confusing topic of OOC (Out Of Character) vs. IC (In Character) issues and the role of moderation in Gorean roleplay. She explained that sim rules govern OOC matters (player conduct, combat mechanics), while Gorean laws govern IC events (character conduct). Being a moderator in Olni allows her to address both comprehensively.
Key Discussion Points:
IMs (Instant Messages) as OOC: It was firmly established that all IMs are OOC and, as such, are inadmissible as legal evidence in an IC trial. While frustrating, this adheres to Linden Lab's Terms of Service (TOS) regarding privacy and sharing. The only way to "render them IC" is through a character's direct IC testimony about what was said, not by presenting the IM logs themselves.
Other Common OOC Issues: Participants identified other OOC elements that frequently "cloud cases," including:
Profile information, name tags, and group tags: These are OOC and cannot be used as IC evidence.
Real-life (RL) issues/personal relationships bleeding into RP: This can create OOC motives for IC actions, which, if suspected, may lead to the Magistrate invalidating the case or reporting it to a moderator. An example was given of a feud originating outside SL (e.g., IMVU) and spilling into SL, which was deemed OOC "griefing."
Slave behavior in IMs: Slaves are free to speak as they wish in OOC IMs, as these are not IC interactions and do not reflect their IC submission. If OOC IMs become disruptive or harassing, it becomes a rules infraction (OOC issue), not an IC legal matter, and can lead to muting or even banning.
Role of Magistrates and Moderators: Janette stressed the need for Magistrates to have the support of good moderators (whether they are moderators themselves or have reliable colleagues) and clear city rules to handle OOC issues effectively. She also mentioned the importance of regularly amending city laws/rules to cover new issues (e.g., limiting tarns in combat for lag reasons).
RP Quality and Rules: The discussion touched on how detailed rules (e.g., number of lines for RP actions like climbing a wall) can improve RP quality by preventing "God modding" or "pew-pew" combat.
Veiling Customs: The group clarified that, according to the Gorean books, wearing a veil is more of a custom or matter of modesty, not a strict law. While not wearing a veil might be scandalous in some cities or lead to a woman being "judged more harshly" or having "less status and protection," it generally does not, by itself, lead to enslavement. Exposing one's "belly or heat" (often referred to as "devil's dumpling") is considered "collarin' behaviour."
NC (Non-Combat) RP: Janette clarified that while "NC'ed action" (pre-set emotes or actions without proper RP interaction) in combat is bad, NC RP for ceremonies (like a Free Companionship ceremony) is acceptable.
Slave Evidence: Charles Esharham interjected to remind the class that a slave's evidence is generally useless unless "verified under torture," highlighting the historical context of Gorean law.
The class concluded with Janette assigning homework (reading provided "law scrolls," "Bob's rules of moderation," and an OOC/IC lecture) in preparation for a case study next week and a quiz in Week 8.
===============================================================================
[2010/10/11 13:01] janette Inglewood: Tal everyone welcome to week 6
[2010/10/11 13:01] janette Inglewood: of the Magistrate course
[2010/10/11 13:01] Leshil Jierdon: Tal Lady Jan
[2010/10/11 13:01] Rayah Marenwolf: smiles "tal lady Janette"
[2010/10/11 13:02] janette Inglewood: i want to use today to examine ooc issues....moderation and where the 2 cross
[2010/10/11 13:02] Leshil Jierdon: /me laughs
[2010/10/11 13:02] janette Inglewood: we have touched on it in every class so far
[2010/10/11 13:03] janette Inglewood: and it is an issue that never goes away
[2010/10/11 13:03] Charles Esharham: /me nods
[2010/10/11 13:04] janette Inglewood: in Olni......i am a moderator.....mainly so i can actually deal with issues in their entirity
[2010/10/11 13:04] janette Inglewood: now.....tell me...the difference between sim rules and laws is?
[2010/10/11 13:05] Desiree Paneer: @
[2010/10/11 13:05] janette Inglewood: Desiree?
[2010/10/11 13:06] Desiree Paneer: One of the major differences seems to be, the sim rules are concerned with things such as conduct, pre, during and post combat, and the consequences derived fromw inning, or losing said combat
[2010/10/11 13:07] janette Inglewood: in other words rules cover ooc issues
[2010/10/11 13:07] janette Inglewood: non-gorean matters
[2010/10/11 13:07] Desiree Paneer: Player conduct, rather than character conduct, yes
[2010/10/11 13:07] janette Inglewood: laws cover IC events
[2010/10/11 13:08] janette Inglewood: i know You will see this presented differently in some Cities
[2010/10/11 13:08] janette Inglewood: but essentially it remains true
[2010/10/11 13:09] janette Inglewood: in legal terms...what are all IM's?
[2010/10/11 13:09] Leshil Jierdon: @
[2010/10/11 13:09] janette Inglewood: Leshil?
[2010/10/11 13:09] Leshil Jierdon: OOC chat
[2010/10/11 13:09] janette Inglewood: yes...OOC
[2010/10/11 13:09] janette Inglewood: as such...inadmissable
[2010/10/11 13:09] Leshil Jierdon: /me nods lots
[2010/10/11 13:10] janette Inglewood: how might we render them IC?
[2010/10/11 13:10] Leshil Jierdon: @
[2010/10/11 13:10] janette Inglewood: Leshil
[2010/10/11 13:11] Leshil Jierdon: The one time I've doen so was to interview someone I could NOT get to IC. I asked htem before hand and they agreed that the convo would be considered IC for any and all purposes.
[2010/10/11 13:11] Desiree Paneer: @
[2010/10/11 13:12] janette Inglewood: hmmm...yes ....it is best to get them to relay the conversation as testimony
[2010/10/11 13:12] janette Inglewood: Desiree?
[2010/10/11 13:12] Desiree Paneer: I wouldn't.
[2010/10/11 13:12] Desiree Paneer: It's too easy for a person, to at any stage to turn around and say you've violated TOS
[2010/10/11 13:13] Desiree Paneer: Best, leave it out and work with what is beyond question and reproach.
[2010/10/11 13:13] janette Inglewood: well yes...sharing IM's is in theory a breach of TOS
[2010/10/11 13:14] janette Inglewood: so...render i IC by someone telling You what was said
[2010/10/11 13:14] Desiree Paneer: And if the don't have the case go their way, it's easy enough for them to go sour and take it all back, say they felt pressured etc
[2010/10/11 13:14] janette Inglewood: this can be frustrating
[2010/10/11 13:14] Leshil Jierdon: Aye
[2010/10/11 13:14] Leshil Jierdon: /me nods lots again
[2010/10/11 13:14] janette Inglewood: say...Chrles elss me in an IM...He intends to murder His FC
[2010/10/11 13:14] janette Inglewood: *tells
[2010/10/11 13:15] Nadhirrah Nyoki: Greetings Masters and Mistress
[2010/10/11 13:15] Nadhirrah Nyoki: Masters Saluti e Mistress
[2010/10/11 13:15] janette Inglewood: next day i find Her body
[2010/10/11 13:15] Charles Esharham: /me startles
[2010/10/11 13:15] janette Inglewood: forgive the example Charles....chuckles
[2010/10/11 13:15] Desiree Paneer: If it's not local. I can't use it. I can't use IM, or Profile information. Sometimes it's frustrating, but so is real life
[2010/10/11 13:16] janette Inglewood: if i go to court....i can say He told me privately He was going to do this?
[2010/10/11 13:16] Desiree Paneer: You could say that, even if he'd said it in local.
[2010/10/11 13:17] janette Inglewood: but it was an IM.......OOC....maybe He was being silly.....i cant prove anything with it
[2010/10/11 13:17] Rayah Marenwolf: nods
[2010/10/11 13:18] Charles Esharham: /me nods
[2010/10/11 13:18] Desiree Paneer: If you don't tell me it was in IM.... I can't know, as soon as you say it's IM. I'm afaird I can't use it. Simply because most sims state, as do people's profiles that IM's are OOC
[2010/10/11 13:18] Rayah Marenwolf: What if you state in your profile all Ims are ic
[2010/10/11 13:18] janette Inglewood: of course......i know in my own mind wwhag was said
[2010/10/11 13:18] Leshil Jierdon: @
[2010/10/11 13:18] janette Inglewood: ummm well really that means nothing Rayah
[2010/10/11 13:19] Rayah Marenwolf: nods
[2010/10/11 13:19] janette Inglewood: Linden TOS say one cannot share IM'S
[2010/10/11 13:19] Charles Esharham: IMs are by definition ALWAYS OOC, no matter what profiles say. Linden Law.
[2010/10/11 13:19] Desiree Paneer: /me sedates Charles
[2010/10/11 13:20] janette Inglewood: Leshil?
[2010/10/11 13:20] Calon Yoshikawa: @
[2010/10/11 13:20] Leshil Jierdon: In SL as well as RL, anyone can say that they are going to kill someone, hell I do it all the time. But thefact remains, just cause she says he told me privately he was going to kill her, the prosecution still has to prove intent and opportunity.
[2010/10/11 13:20] janette Inglewood: correct
[2010/10/11 13:20] Xavier Wrexan: Walks into the room with stealthy silence.
[2010/10/11 13:20] janette Inglewood: Calon?
[2010/10/11 13:21] Calon Yoshikawa: its the same problem also for resque for capturing people....IM can not be used as trace to find the captured people, simply IM DOENT EXIST in RP
[2010/10/11 13:21] Xavier Wrexan: (what of fleers)
[2010/10/11 13:22] janette Inglewood: yes thats right
[2010/10/11 13:22] janette Inglewood: all IM is OOC in the eyes of the law
[2010/10/11 13:22] janette Inglewood: please remember that
[2010/10/11 13:22] Xavier Wrexan: Raises his hand to ask a question
[2010/10/11 13:22] janette Inglewood: Xavier?
[2010/10/11 13:23] Xavier Wrexan: Let us say in the rp we send a fleer can an IM be used
[2010/10/11 13:23] janette Inglewood: as in a fugitive You mean?
[2010/10/11 13:23] Xavier Wrexan: nay
[2010/10/11 13:23] Desiree Paneer: I would reccomend a note card of RP, rather than am IM
[2010/10/11 13:23] Xavier Wrexan: as in a homing bird of flight
[2010/10/11 13:23] Leshil Jierdon: A falcon
[2010/10/11 13:24] Xavier Wrexan: nods
[2010/10/11 13:24] Xavier Wrexan: a fleer
[2010/10/11 13:24] janette Inglewood: ahh well...in Olni...we only accept use of those if You show us the cage.......and how Your actually have message birds
[2010/10/11 13:24] Xavier Wrexan: nods
[2010/10/11 13:24] janette Inglewood: yes i suppose it can be employed
[2010/10/11 13:25] Xavier Wrexan: The cityy of Hazelwood has such birds of flight
[2010/10/11 13:25] janette Inglewood: but it must be very precise
[2010/10/11 13:26] janette Inglewood: again...if it ends up as valid in court...i would want to see the rp of it
[2010/10/11 13:27] janette Inglewood: Now...as well as IM's being ooc....what other common ooc issues cloud cases?
[2010/10/11 13:27] Desiree Paneer: @
[2010/10/11 13:27] janette Inglewood: Desiree
[2010/10/11 13:27] Desiree Paneer: Profile information...
[2010/10/11 13:27] Desiree Paneer: /me groans
[2010/10/11 13:27] Rayah Marenwolf: nods
[2010/10/11 13:27] janette Inglewood: yes very much so
[2010/10/11 13:27] Leshil Jierdon: aye
[2010/10/11 13:27] Xavier Wrexan: aye aye
[2010/10/11 13:27] Calon Yoshikawa: @
[2010/10/11 13:28] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: @
[2010/10/11 13:28] janette Inglewood: a profile saying....member of killers of Gor
[2010/10/11 13:28] janette Inglewood: /me laughs
[2010/10/11 13:28] janette Inglewood: Calon?
[2010/10/11 13:28] Calon Yoshikawa: also name and group....its a common mistake, I did it at first times...
[2010/10/11 13:29] janette Inglewood: yes...name is a very common one
[2010/10/11 13:29] janette Inglewood: often i say...did You get their name?
[2010/10/11 13:30] janette Inglewood: Volmarr
[2010/10/11 13:30] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: people's relationships that extend outside of RP only, also causes where people are Gorean not just in a RP only sense, it is an extension of themselves in a sense.
[2010/10/11 13:30] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: *cases
[2010/10/11 13:30] janette Inglewood: yes!
[2010/10/11 13:30] Xavier Wrexan: @
[2010/10/11 13:30] janette Inglewood: very often this links into motive
[2010/10/11 13:31] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: people can have the motive to get people for unGorean like actions
[2010/10/11 13:31] Xavier Wrexan: @
[2010/10/11 13:31] janette Inglewood: a quick example...... a case where he feud actually eminated from another chat room...imvu
[2010/10/11 13:32] Leshil Jierdon: That's so rediculous.
[2010/10/11 13:32] janette Inglewood: it spilled into sl...i had to call it all ooc....griefing virtually
[2010/10/11 13:32] janette Inglewood: Xavier
[2010/10/11 13:32] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: It's not reduulas, some poeple have been who they are in RP extending back to other places before they came to SL
[2010/10/11 13:33] Xavier Wrexan: has the question of slaves bing less then submitted by their words in OOc allow them to go without discipline?
[2010/10/11 13:33] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: SL is not the only place with Gor RP
[2010/10/11 13:33] janette Inglewood: well yes...if it is consistent real rp...like from Gor chat...i suppose
[2010/10/11 13:33] Xavier Wrexan: being*
[2010/10/11 13:33] janette Inglewood: slaves may talk how they want in IM's
[2010/10/11 13:33] Xavier Wrexan: shakes head
[2010/10/11 13:33] janette Inglewood: they are ooc
[2010/10/11 13:33] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: @
[2010/10/11 13:33] Leshil Jierdon: @
[2010/10/11 13:34] Xavier Wrexan: nay nay
[2010/10/11 13:34] janette Inglewood: not in charactter....hence not slaves
[2010/10/11 13:34] Xavier Wrexan: then the comments should be not Ic related
[2010/10/11 13:34] janette Inglewood: it is by its very term....out of chahracter of a slave
[2010/10/11 13:34] janette Inglewood: Volmarr?
[2010/10/11 13:35] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: how best to deal with slaves that like to IM you but in a case in which you only like interacting with them as a slave? telling them to not IM you does not always work as many seem to be insistant on IMing anyways or get very angry that you don't want to interact with them outside of RP
[2010/10/11 13:36] janette Inglewood: yes correct....any opinion expressed ooc is disregared....speak of IC things IC'ly
[2010/10/11 13:37] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: but how to get them to leave you alone if they seem to keep pestering you in IMs seeking attention?
[2010/10/11 13:37] janette Inglewood: i know this gets abused all the time...im just saying how it should be
[2010/10/11 13:37] Leshil Jierdon: mute them
[2010/10/11 13:37] Rayah Marenwolf: laughs
[2010/10/11 13:37] Charles Esharham: @
[2010/10/11 13:37] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: but then it makes it hard dealing with them IC in main since they are muted
[2010/10/11 13:37] Xavier Wrexan: then have they understood what is submission
[2010/10/11 13:37] Desiree Paneer: Tell them very, very clearly you want the conversation to end.
[2010/10/11 13:37] janette Inglewood: also......you can deem it as a rules infaction
[2010/10/11 13:37] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: many don't respect your wishes for the conservation to end
[2010/10/11 13:38] janette Inglewood: in Olni...we frown on im;s for any rp at all
[2010/10/11 13:38] Desiree Paneer: Then they're dumber than a sack of wet mice.
[2010/10/11 13:38] Charles Esharham: @
[2010/10/11 13:38] janette Inglewood: Leshil
[2010/10/11 13:39] Leshil Jierdon: I was just gonna say, you can't let arguments from one chat or Gor source impede on role play in SL Gor as they two are unrelated in all sense of the word.
[2010/10/11 13:39] Leshil Jierdon: WHat happens on Earth ina group shouldn't affect what happens in Gor in a different group.
[2010/10/11 13:39] janette Inglewood: there may be cases where it is continued rp
[2010/10/11 13:39] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: I diagree, many people have charactors that interact in both, as long as both are Gor they can cross over
[2010/10/11 13:40] janette Inglewood: but it is rare
[2010/10/11 13:40] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: it tends to be more so the very long old timer Gorean Rpers though
[2010/10/11 13:40] janette Inglewood: but yes in theory it could be one rp
[2010/10/11 13:40] janette Inglewood: Charles
[2010/10/11 13:42] Charles Esharham: I just wish to state clearly that where evidence of a slave is concerned, this evidence is useless unless verified under torture. so dont rely on a slaves evidence when judging a case unless it is properly verified.
[2010/10/11 13:42] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: /me nods in agreement
[2010/10/11 13:42] janette Inglewood: indeed
[2010/10/11 13:43] janette Inglewood: now....rules come into play....
[2010/10/11 13:43] Xavier Wrexan: directs the scribe to make not of the comment for the next Highcouncil meeting
[2010/10/11 13:43] Desiree Paneer: and opinions.
[2010/10/11 13:43] janette Inglewood: if for example my attempts to investigate a case IC'ly.....
[2010/10/11 13:43] Xavier Wrexan: note*
[2010/10/11 13:44] janette Inglewood: are endlessly spoiled by a mouthy slave who shouts the odds in IMs
[2010/10/11 13:44] janette Inglewood: i can turn round and point to her breaking the rules
[2010/10/11 13:45] janette Inglewood: indeed i can ban her for such if persistent
[2010/10/11 13:45] janette Inglewood: since it is destroying all rp
[2010/10/11 13:45] Rayah Marenwolf: nods
[2010/10/11 13:46] janette Inglewood: hence...as Magistrates You need to know You have the support of good mods
[2010/10/11 13:46] janette Inglewood: either yourself...or reliable colleagues
[2010/10/11 13:46] janette Inglewood: and...good clear City rules....to back You up
[2010/10/11 13:47] janette Inglewood: ideally all of You will have some input into Your city laws and rules at some point
[2010/10/11 13:47] janette Inglewood: i amend hemhere whenever a new issue seems to not be covered
[2010/10/11 13:47] janette Inglewood: *them
[2010/10/11 13:48] janette Inglewood: of course we dont want a book the size of tarnsman just of rules
[2010/10/11 13:48] janette Inglewood: but........you need everything covered
[2010/10/11 13:48] janette Inglewood: a recent amendmeng for example...was liniting to 2 tarns per side
[2010/10/11 13:49] janette Inglewood: laggy sorry for typing
[2010/10/11 13:49] janette Inglewood: amendment...limiting
[2010/10/11 13:49] janette Inglewood: precisely for reasons of lag
[2010/10/11 13:49] janette Inglewood: more than that and we all seemed to freeze
[2010/10/11 13:49] Calon Yoshikawa: @
[2010/10/11 13:50] janette Inglewood: so....stick it in the rulebook
[2010/10/11 13:50] janette Inglewood: yes Calon?
[2010/10/11 13:50] Calon Yoshikawa: but too much rules, like the cities that also say how many lines or RP for a rope, an aid,,etc...dont cause deterioration of RP ?
[2010/10/11 13:51] Calon Yoshikawa: *of RP...
[2010/10/11 13:51] Leshil Jierdon: no
[2010/10/11 13:51] janette Inglewood: well.....yes it can.......and there comes a point where one must not be a pedant
[2010/10/11 13:51] janette Inglewood: however.....
[2010/10/11 13:52] Leshil Jierdon: BUt setting limits makes hte RP more rounded and gives all chacnes to react
[2010/10/11 13:52] janette Inglewood: if i am whisked away over a wall in one line of rp....grabs Jan climbs wall...leaves
[2010/10/11 13:52] Leshil Jierdon: exactly
[2010/10/11 13:52] janette Inglewood: then of course ill not accept it
[2010/10/11 13:52] Desiree Paneer: most of those rules, are in place to make people rp, rather than pew pew
[2010/10/11 13:52] Leshil Jierdon: exactly
[2010/10/11 13:53] Xavier Wrexan: then preset emotes are illegal?
[2010/10/11 13:53] Desiree Paneer: Yes! Thank God.
[2010/10/11 13:53] Leshil Jierdon: That's called God modding
[2010/10/11 13:53] Desiree Paneer: It's called being a shite roleplayer
[2010/10/11 13:53] Xavier Wrexan: laughs
[2010/10/11 13:53] janette Inglewood: a small breach in an otherwise perfect rp......well best to let it go
[2010/10/11 13:53] Rayah Marenwolf: @
[2010/10/11 13:54] Xavier Wrexan: seems it more common as of late
[2010/10/11 13:54] janette Inglewood: yes...nc'ed action is just bad
[2010/10/11 13:54] janette Inglewood: Rayah?
[2010/10/11 13:55] Rayah Marenwolf: I am confused about the veil seems some cities allow women to be with or without a viel according to their choice, but is that gorean, i thought removing the veil could get you collared?
[2010/10/11 13:55] Desiree Paneer: ooh oooh ooh!
[2010/10/11 13:55] janette Inglewood: it is up to each City
[2010/10/11 13:55] Desiree Paneer: It's not actually... even in the Books of Gor written anywhere as a law to wear a veil!
[2010/10/11 13:56] Xavier Wrexan: aye aye aye
[2010/10/11 13:56] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: low caste are more likely not to wear a viel, high caste more likely to wear
[2010/10/11 13:56] janette Inglewood: in the books there was wide variation
[2010/10/11 13:56] Rayah Marenwolf: nods
[2010/10/11 13:56] Desiree Paneer: It's a matter of propriety, and it can be scandalous to now wear a veil.. but.. it shouldn't get you collared
[2010/10/11 13:56] Desiree Paneer: not*
[2010/10/11 13:56] janette Inglewood: it is nore a custom....modesty in some places
[2010/10/11 13:56] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: they won't get collared for it, just sent home perhaps to get one
[2010/10/11 13:56] janette Inglewood: yes
[2010/10/11 13:56] Rayah Marenwolf: nods
[2010/10/11 13:56] janette Inglewood: same here in Olni...Lady we prefer a veil please
[2010/10/11 13:56] Desiree Paneer: getting your devil's dumpling, belly or legs out, that's collarin' behaviour that is
[2010/10/11 13:57] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: but any woman that does not wear one will get judged more harshly if they get in trouble for legal stuff
[2010/10/11 13:57] janette Inglewood: /me laughs
[2010/10/11 13:57] Leshil Jierdon: Hell, I say take off what ya don't want to wear and look good ladies...fingers the collar
[2010/10/11 13:57] janette Inglewood: yes Volmarr exactly
[2010/10/11 13:57] Xavier Wrexan: grins
[2010/10/11 13:57] janette Inglewood: somehow having less status and protection
[2010/10/11 13:57] Charles Esharham: @
[2010/10/11 13:58] janette Inglewood: well.....tempus fugit
[2010/10/11 13:58] Xavier Wrexan: they do make veils out of cheap stuff too he grins
[2010/10/11 13:58] janette Inglewood: Charles?
[2010/10/11 13:58] Desiree Paneer: I had a discussion with someone about 'diaphonous' veils and how women wearing them should be collared.
[2010/10/11 13:58] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: it's showing belly or heat that will get a woman collared, some low caste have to hike up their skirts to have it out of the way to work such as Peasants
[2010/10/11 13:58] Charles Esharham: i want to come back on the statement that NCed rp is always bad.
[2010/10/11 13:58] Charles Esharham: the are exceptions
[2010/10/11 13:59] janette Inglewood: hmmm yes...such as?
[2010/10/11 13:59] Xavier Wrexan: ceremonies
[2010/10/11 13:59] Desiree Paneer: no one tucks their skirts all the way up into their knickers Vol... don't be silly
[2010/10/11 13:59] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: up to their knees at times, in the books
[2010/10/11 13:59] Desiree Paneer: I said legs, not shins.
[2010/10/11 13:59] Charles Esharham: suppose you are doing a FCship ceremony that is NCed according to the wishes of the couple.....I see nothing wrong in that. #
[2010/10/11 13:59] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: lower legs are considered legs
[2010/10/11 14:00] Rayah Marenwolf: nods "true
[2010/10/11 14:00] Desiree Paneer: You're just arguing for arguments sake.
[2010/10/11 14:00] VolmarrGoth Vollmar: you are desiree
[2010/10/11 14:00] janette Inglewood: oh no..i dont mean that....non combat is fine Charles
[2010/10/11 14:00] Desiree Paneer: /me has a flash back to fourth grade and shudders
[2010/10/11 14:00] janette Inglewood: now..i shall be sending a lot out in group in a while
[2010/10/11 14:00] Charles Esharham: /me nods to Jan
[2010/10/11 14:00] Xavier Wrexan: legs covered means legs covered
[2010/10/11 14:01] janette Inglewood: including some homework
[2010/10/11 14:01] Xavier Wrexan: not thigh coveered
[2010/10/11 14:01] janette Inglewood: those expecting to pass...must get this work done
[2010/10/11 14:01] Leshil Jierdon: homeworK?...grumbles
[2010/10/11 14:02] janette Inglewood: also...Bobs rules of moderation.....class script......
[2010/10/11 14:02] janette Inglewood: and an ooc /ic lecture i did some time ago
[2010/10/11 14:02] janette Inglewood: please read them
[2010/10/11 14:02] Leshil Jierdon: nods
[2010/10/11 14:03] janette Inglewood: next week we will go through a case study...and week 8...is quiz time
[2010/10/11 14:03] janette Inglewood: thank You all...and be well
[2010/10/11 14:03] Xavier Wrexan: makes note not to visit during quiz time
[2010/10/11 14:03] janette Inglewood: and thank You for a good debate
No comments:
Post a Comment