No, your eye is not a vital organ. Unless it's from pain, blood loss, or other secondaries, eye damage will not mean death.
This is why historically we find some particularly unpleasant ocular tortures.
if you just want it "invisible", set the opacity to 0
to make the element removed, use display: none
if you want just clicks to not hit it, use pointer-events: none
if you uhhhh
if you hate living, use cursor: none
okay look the reason why you can't have special display names or anything is because your username is really the only thing that identifies you. If you change it all the time you're completely changing your identity. What if everyone changed their name to KillJoy all the time? It doesn't matter if YOU won't abuse it, because people like Elzo and I will, and it's super annoyin
if you're not able to understand that words have multiple meanings then you're the one who will be easy to fool. The assumed interpretation, rather than getting you out of things, will just create a rift in understand between the two parties. Since YOU know what you did, it's more likely that the other party, rather than being frustrated at themselves, will be frustrated at you for intentionally making yourself unclear.
Lumage[04:09]o: [rpl20nick]null's name is now test
Lumage[04:13]o: [rpl20nick]null's name is now test
Lumage[04:13]o: [rpl20nick]null's name is now Pussy_Destroyer
Lumage[04:47]o: [rpl20nick]Lumage's name is now Sakuya Cock
Random and I share pretty much the same policy on dealing with things, but we don't write down rules for two reasons that I can think of (that are essentially the same thing)
First, strict rules means that they have to be truly the rules you WANT to have. When authorities anywhere enact punishment, it's never because of the rules as much as it is 'need for enforcement'
The rules and laws only support that punishment.
You can get away with piracy if no one brings it up specifically against you because there's usually not a 'need for enforcement'
Murder almost always is judged to have that need.
Sometimes people can twist things and convince others that there is no need for enforcement, and get away without facing what the written rule indicates should be done.
So then you have to judge 'need for enforcement' and have a rule that properly supports that. This means your rule has to be precise and thought out. If it isn't, it won't serve you. "Test bots in development," "Don't be rude"... these are not rules. They are vague and arguable and make too many assumptions where the staff simply doesn't judge things as the rules are written to.
The second problem is related. If you have written rules, you lose your power of judgement to the ability of the people to apply that same rule.
This compounds the problem with "poorly-made" rules. It allows for any true loopholes to be undeniably within the argument of the people at the other end of the stick, where it may not be the same understanding or intention that you have. If you have the rule not to say "shit" and someone says "shiit" and you try to enforce it with the understanding that the meaning was implied, all they have to do is use the rule literally. "mine has two i's, thus I did nothing wrong."
So that's why we don't have "rules" and the basis of record's complaint about them. Obviously there's no way you could have known this (and this is all largely conjecture and observation, I'm clearly not qualified as a social scientist), but we had badly written rules on wikia and it was the same thing. You're only "being rude" because staff wants to ban you, ahh but this is an abuse of staff power, demote them, no but you're trying to "cause drama"-- a terrible mess. Unless you think you have a perfect understanding of the English Language and all implications possible, do not resort to rules.
But not having strict rules clearly doesn't lead to anarchy. That's because we still follow "policies." The staff are free to exercise judgement of the situation, but have an idea of what they should and should not stop.
If it's genuinely disruptive, that's not okay.
But we don't try to make a definition of "spam" as "disruptive"-- that leads to issues with interpretation. There are situations where the rest of chat is fine with it, and then it doesn't make sense to ban or step in in any other way.
That's why it's okay that record's bot refreshes in hiding. It's not disruptive. The urging people to test in development is because refreshing out of hiding IS disruptive. And that's where you have to make that judgement.
If you truly want to ban all bots, that's fine. It'll make people upset. But so long as you're consistent to your reasoning and you HAVE reasoning (perhaps that they do not fit some imagined nature of sbs as a human community for smilebasic) you can make that judgement. Do know also that you can and will be questioned. You are human. You are not always right. Not every complaint deserves the same level of consideration, but you must be willing to admit wrongdoing.
Don't let that lead to hesitation, though. You should, for example, know perfectly well how you intend a ban to play out before implementing it, not apply it and have to reconsider it soon afterwards.
One of the strongest youkai living around SmileBASIC Source, but her personality is such that one can never tell what she's thinking, so she's a very uncharismatic youkai.
However, she actually seems to be quite sharp-witted...
[b]Threat Level[/b]: Extremely High
[b]Human Friendship Level[/b]: Worst
silly human, trying to pose
silly human, plants have no woes
trying to be a youkai, you make me sigh
because such denial reminds me of i
that's why I say this: it'll make you hiss
or will interpretation make the meaning amiss?
"first I think you need sexual hermaphroditism
this way you can trade responsibility for maternity [read: gestation and childbirth], which patches one of the big balance issues
and related to the above, intercourse should cause egg release into the gestation chamber, avoiding redundant menstrual cycles
also a lot of genetic refactoring in general
the gene->phenotype map is kind of a clusterfuck
also, turn most survival instincts down or off
specifically andrenaline response which is responsible more for anxiety than any quick reactions
but also increase reaction time and the time points put into fine motor tuning during early development
this MIGHT result in more skewerings when taken into a wild and unknown situation, but half the time people still just freeze up with fight-or-flight and get skewered anyway
also tentacles instead of arms having bones is kind of a pain in the ass, and maneuverability is worth trading for lever-driven mechanical strength"
>hm maybe tentacles would be cool
>but I like hands
"how about tentacles with opposable thumbs
like they're forked on the end maybe
body hair doesn't need to exist any more better to prevent itching, lice infestation, and looking bad than keep a small warmth benefit scalp hair still exists, but it's photosynthetic"