Suggestions.

[levi]

Hey guys.

I have two brief suggestions.

• Changing the color of input boxes on the site.
  
• Lifting the ban on boys.
  

My reasoning for both:

The input boxes can be difficult for someone new to find, especially if they've never used proboards before. For me, I know it's really frustrating to go around clicking until I land on it -- especially on forms I'm not too familiar with the placement of. Like when I'm signing in and stuff. I know in the side bar I couldn't figure out where the password box was until I realized they were right next to each other. So just a friendly suggestion that they should be just a little bit lighter or darker than the rest of the skin.

As for the lift on boys:

It looks like right now boys are at a 80:155 ratio while girls are at 75:155. It's not even by any means, but the percentages -- roughly -- are 51% for boys and 48 % for girls. That's a 3% difference. Really, that's not that big of a deal, and it's perfectly natural for the site numbers to be that close. A lot sites have numbers more like boys at 70% and girls at 30%. These numbers are actually damn near even. I propose we lift the ban because there is no longer any reason for it.

[JURATE]

Both decent suggestions, except, I know like ... literally zero coding so no idea how to make the fields coloured. That is the issue, and I don't think any of the staffers do either, otherwise we would.

The time when the ban was made, we had like ... 63 girls and 79 boys there was a complete reason for it. And most people here like making males, so the moment the ban is lifted, people will keep making boys because that's just the way the site has always been. I can tweak the role a little, to keep the numbers equal, but I know this site, and there will be a boom of boys as there always is.

[shae]

Thought I might second this. I definitely agree with what you are saying. I've seen it on many other sites as well. At least for the boy ratio part. As for the input boxes, I can see where they can get confusing, so maybe if it gets changed, it will help clear things up. *shrugs*

[levi]

Both decent suggestions, except, I know like ... literally zero coding so no idea how to make the fields coloured. That is the issue, and I don't think any of the staffers do either, otherwise we would.
I can fix it for you. It's a simple tweak in CSS style sheet. It's very easy.

The time when the ban was made, we had like ... 63 girls and 79 boys there was a complete reason for it. And most people here like making males, so the moment the ban is lifted, people will keep making boys because that's just the way the site has always been. I can tweak the role a little, to keep the numbers equal, but I know this site, and there will be a boom of boys as there always is.

Saying "there will be a problem because I just know" isn't a sufficient reason for keeping a ban in place.

[JURATE]

Well, if you know how to do the code, that would be extremely helpful and appreciated. Could you maybe PM me or something?

Ah, I didn't mean it in a horrible way, and I didn't say the ban would be there forever. I just mean it's not really a ban anyway, it is asking people to make more girls cause they are usually out of balance here. And I did say that tweaks can be made, so I didn't say that the ban would be kept. Just to make things more equal for the members and the site in general, you know?

[levi]

I would need to see the whole code of the General Header first; if you can PM that to me, I can make the adjustments and send it back to you.

As for the girls/guys ban:

There does state, under the application process, "bans". You've labeled as a ban, therefore the members see it as a ban. I know you're not trying to be cruel. I'm trying to help you see the logical side for the better of the site.

I crunched some numbers, and based off of what I've found, I'd say that if you're worried about an equal division of characters, perhaps you should be more concerned with the serious overpopulation of heterosexual and male/female characters. It's obvious that the numbers haven't been updated in a while, considering that the sidebar says there are a total of 155 characters. But I've decided to crunch the numbers as they stand. If you decide to update the list, I will gladly edit my numbers accordingly.

Also --, Bi-curious individuals would technically identify as straight, and if not then they are not properly labeled as characters and should, in fact, be placed into the bi-sexual category. Bi-curious is not, in fact, a sexuality. It’s a state of being and a conflicting point in time. It's a deviation from the homosexual orientation that the character identifies with.

Characters may sometimes identify differently than they behave. Just because a character identifies as straight does not mean that he or she will never experience attraction to a member of their sex.

So, I’m going to go ahead and add the total bi-curious to the straight count, considering that they probably identify as such. Just letting you know! If anyone in that list decides that their character actually identifies as bisexual, I'll edit that into the equation as well.

As it stands:

Heterosexuals:

• Males: 46
  
• Females: 38
  
• Total: 84
  
• Percentage: 69.4%
  

Homosexuals:

• Males: 7
  
• Females: 5
  
• Total: 12
  
• Percentage: 9.9%
  

Pansexuals:

• Males: 2
  
• Females: 4
  
• Total: 6
  
• Percentage: 4.9%
  

Bisexuals:

• Males: 6
  
• Females: 10
  
• Total: 16
  
• Percentage: 13.2%
  

Asexuals:

• Males: 1
  
• Females: 2
  
• Total: 3
  
• Percentage: 2.4%
  
  
  As you can see, there's a major overpopulation of straight, singularly male/female characters. From what I've seen there are no intersex individuals and the gay, bisexual, asexual and pansexual groups are vastly lesser than the others. If equality and equal numbers of population is what we're going for as a site, I think there are groups suffering more on the site in misrepresentation here than the female group.
  
  There is no coercing a member into making a certain character. Telling someone that the character they make should be a certain way isn't right, whether it's that they should be a certain sex because the numbers are slightly skewed, or that they should be a certain sexuality because the heterosexuals vastly outnumber the others. I propose that we dash these kinds of bans as they only stifle our creativity and freedoms, and I propose that we leave them in the past. They don't work.
  

[levi]

I meant the Global Header. I apologize.

[EMILY]

Well, I agree with Jurate's "bans" because its very easy for the site to have a ton even though it's not technically by stats from the claims. If that made any sense. When she put up those suggestions, there was quite a few. This isn't the first time she's put up this rule/ban, and it worked out fine before. She isn't trying to offend anyone or go CAN'T MAKE THESE PEOPLE RAWR. I think most people understand. I think Jur's doing fine there. But I do like the little inbox idea <3

[levi]

Well, I agree with Jurate's "bans" because its very easy for the site to have a ton even though it's not technically by stats from the claims. If that made any sense. When she put up those suggestions, there was quite a few. This isn't the first time she's put up this rule/ban, and it worked out fine before. She isn't trying to offend anyone or go CAN'T MAKE THESE PEOPLE RAWR. I think most people understand. I think Jur's doing fine there. But I do like the little inbox idea <3

This isn't a personal issue for me. It's a logical issue. And this, in fact, is called a ban in the boards. Take a look. Just a friendly reminder. If they're not bans, they shouldn't be listed as such.

I'm saying that logically, if we're looking at trying to make things more equal, there's more of a problem with the orientations than the sexes. And on top of that, we have /no/ intersex characters. It's not like I'm trying to be argumentative. I'm saying if this is for the sake of diversity, fine, let's address a real issue.

And the sex issue isn't one of them.

[FADED]

Actually up until you brought it up it hasn't been an issue. I agree with Jurate's rules and seeing as she has already stated that they are there for a reason then I don't think we really need to keep going around in circles with this personally speaking.

[levi]

No one has brought it up because you guys are very closely knit. It's a little daunting when the administrators just go "I agree that this should be in place just because". I know of a handful of members that take issue with it.

Is there no room for consideration? I'm asking you to think about this logically. Don't you see the parallels?

[JOSEPHINE OLIVIA CAMPBELL]

I've read through all the different sides of this issue, and as someone who's been playing here for about three months, I'd like to say, first and foremost, that Nightmare has become somewhat of a home away from home for me. My friends here have become just as valuable as my friends in the real world, and I'd hate to see something so trivial make us draw lines in the sand. However, whenever something is written online, there can be a limitation on the tone that is addressed. Because of this, some of the reading I've done has made some of Louis' 'suggestions' come off as a bit aggressive and, in fact, rude. I'm sure it wasn't meant this way, as they were simply friendly reminders, however, I'd like to address a few issues that I see and put in my two cents.

The "BAN" Issue: Jurate placed a ban on the creation of boys because the number of boys vs. girls was extremely skewed on the side of boys outnumbering the girls by a significant margin. When she decided to place the ban, I know it was because at that moment in time, nearly all the characters that had been made for approximately two weeks had been all boys. The numbers were getting higher, and she realized that something had to be done in order to make things more "equal." Therefore, the ban was placed. However, if you read the ban closely, you'll see that the ban states that: "if you're a new member, your first character may be male, but if you have one character or more, the next [character] should be a girl." This was more of an encouragement than a ban, but I believe by placing the word "ban" on it, it gets more attention. Obviously this entire argument proves my point correct here, as it has gotten quite a lot of attention. To you: since you are in the process of creating your first character on the site, you may make a boy. There's nothing limiting you from doing that, so I don't see how this is an issue with you. For the rest of us, making girls is a way for active members to branch out and be more creative instead of just making boy after boy, and once the numbers are more equal, everyone gets free reign to make whatever characters they please again. There's nothing wrong with limitations to keep the site functional and happy.

The "sexuality" issue: This, to me, is irrelevant. Sure, this is a species-based site, but another plot-centric point is in the existence of characters finding a "soul mate," and not in the platonic sense. Statistics in reality state that the number of heterosexual-identifying people are the majority of the world's population. Therefore, since we have more heterosexual characters on this site, we are following with reality's terms of natural selection. More people are straight than gay: this is an understood fact. Also, if you look at our member pool, I'm sure they follow with statistics in that most of them are more likely heterosexual than bisexual, pansexual, intersex, gay, transgendered, etc. There are probably a few who aren't heterosexual, but member sexuality isn't anyone's business, really. My point in this is that my role-playing experience has taught me that people tend to make characters that are familiar to them in some way: if I'm a man who likes women, I will probably make men who like women, because I cannot necessarily relate to a man liking a man. Some players can play this way, not everyone can. So, the sexuality division will likely reflect its members to some degree. By saying that we should all become more "diverse," in my opinion, could alienate some people. If I'm a heterosexual male who just wants to make a heterosexual male, and now I'm more encouraged to make a gay male character, or a lesbian female, or an intersex character, and I have no basis or inspiration to play that character, it might be uncomfortable for me. It's no different than the issues you've placed with the gender "ban," really. If you want to make an intersex character, make one. If you label your character as "bi-curious," you should be allowed to express that freely instead of being lumped into a category that you feel your character does not belong just because it's a "state of being."

In closing, Nightmare is a wonderful place to play, and our moderators and admins all work so hard to make sure that everyone is happy and needs are met, and suggestions are heard. I'm happy to be a member of this community, and I don't see any real issues with the "suggestions" you've made, other than the one about the coding, which I understand is being looked into. The rest of it, until the ban is lifted, should stay as-is, in my opinion.

[/justify]

[levi]

I've read through all the different sides of this issue, and as someone who's been playing here for about three months, I'd like to say, first and foremost, that Nightmare has become somewhat of a home away from home for me. My friends here have become just as valuable as my friends in the real world, and I'd hate to see something so trivial make us draw lines in the sand. However, whenever something is written online, there can be a limitation on the tone that is addressed. Because of this, some of the reading I've done has made some of Louis' 'suggestions' come off as a bit aggressive and, in fact, rude. I'm sure it wasn't meant this way, as they were simply friendly reminders, however, I'd like to address a few issues that I see and put in my two cents.

I hardly meant for my points to come off as rude -- I’m a very direct person. I want to make a change ,so I’m making very direct points. These are suggestions, and you can take them as that. As I have said before, I’m not taking personal issue with anything here. I’m sorry if it’s coming across that way, but I’m not willing to cut corners when I have issues with something.

The "BAN" Issue: Jurate placed a ban on the creation of boys because the number of boys vs. girls was extremely skewed on the side of boys outnumbering the girls by a significant margin. When she decided to place the ban, I know it was because at that moment in time, nearly all the characters that had been made for approximately two weeks had been all boys. The numbers were getting higher, and she realized that something had to be done in order to make things more "equal." Therefore, the ban wa placed.
I don’t disagree with this. If she wanted to make it more equal, that’s fine. I don’t take issue with that if the goal is equal diversity.

However, if you read the ban closely, you'll see that the ban states that: "if you're a new member, your first character may be male, but if you have one character or more, the next [character] should be a girl." This was more of an encouragement than a ban, but I believe by placing the word "ban" on it, it gets more attention. Obviously this entire argument proves my point correct here, as it has gotten quite a lot of attention.
Attention to a ban isn’t always a positive thing. And I knew that already, as you’ve mentioned below, my first character here will be male. However, saying someone can make ‘x’ at first, but then has to make ‘y’ means that this is in fact a ban. I will say this again: it was labeled as a ban and is, therefore, a ban.

To you: since you are in the process of creating your first character on the site, you may make a boy. There's nothing limiting you from doing that, so I don't see how this is an issue with you.
I was part of this site at least a year ago, and I was considering reviving old, male characters for here.Levi is not my first character on Nightmare. However, I will not be able to do that with this ban in place. However, that’s not the sole purpose of the fact that I take issue with this rule. I take issue with it because if I were to, say, make you make an intersex character because they are none, as you’ve mentioned below, you might feel uncomfortable. It’s stifling to creativity. Again, this is not a personal issue for me. This is about creative freedom on the site, and what works best on forums.

For the rest of us, making girls is a way for active members to branch out and be more creative instead of just making boy after boy, and once the numbers are more equal, everyone gets free reign to make whatever characters they please again. There's nothing wrong with limitations to keep the site functional and happy.

Rules are fine, and bans can work in certain situations. But if I ask “why” and the best reason anyone can give me is “I agree with it” and “it makes me uncomfortable” there is a problem with the rule. Questioning things is how we, as human beings, interpret things and learn. It’s also how we better ourselves. I’m not asking these questions or proposing this to make life harder for any of you or to make the site dysfunctional and unhappy. Here you contradict yourself in a point you made later on, saying that if you were a heterosexual male and just wanted to make a heterosexual male character, you might be made uncomfortable if you had to do otherwise. Yet here, you say that pushing members outside of their comfort zones so that they “get more creative and make girls” instead of making boy after boy. How is that different than making heterosexual after heterosexual? Some people are uncomfortable writing girls, and honestly it’s really difficult to do without making archetypes. There is no better a site when you’re saying “I’m uncomfortable if I have to make a homosexual character” but, on the flipside, saying “You’re uncomfortable making a girl character, but you should push yourself and grow”. That’s hypocritical.

The "sexuality" issue: This, to me, is irrelevant. Sure, this is a species-based site, but another plot-centric point is in the existence of characters finding a "soul mate," and not in the platonic sense.
This is not the case for everyone. To say that the plot-centric point of characters is to find ‘their other half’ is , forgive me, a little naive. Characters can be fun to pair, but what the plot centric point of characters is to make them grow and evolve with the introductions of conflict that permanently change the course of their lives or themselves. It’s okay if you feel that way about your characters, but please don’t expect that everyone will feel that way. I don’t. My reason for bringing up sexuality was to tie it into the sex issue. So that you could see that there are parallels between the issues, and that most people wouldn’t like it if I pointed to them and said, “Okay, your first character can be straight. After that, they all have to be gay.” It’s the same thing.


Statistics in reality state that the number of heterosexual-identifying people are the majority of the world's population.
I would like to see these statistic on at least three different reputable sites. I want to know how and when they were gathered. This is assuming that the majority of the Earth’s population took this poll and answered it honestly. That’s a very ethnocentric thing to say.

Therefore, since we have more heterosexual characters on this site, we are following with reality's terms of natural selection.
Natural Selection is the elimination of a certain attribute of a species because it no longer benefits it. Being gay is not something that changes the species ability to survive. We actually have a population problem right now, meaning we’re doing far too good of a job at surviving, and yet the gay population still exists. We have not been bred out of existence -- keep in mind, gay people are born too, and therefore, are born from the heterosexual act of intercourse.

Natural Selection has nothing to do with it.

More people are straight than gay: this is an understood fact
No it is not. It is a common misconception and an ethnocentric view.


Also, if you look at our member pool, I'm sure they follow with statistics in that most of them are more likely heterosexual than bisexual, pansexual, intersex, gay, transgendered, etc. There are probably a few who aren't heterosexual, but member sexuality isn't anyone's business, really.
The population of Nightmare does not accurately portrait the population of the world. I’m not even going to respond to that last part because I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about the ban. That is irrelevant.

My point in this is that my role-playing experience has taught me that people tend to make characters that are familiar to them in some way: if I'm a man who likes women, I will probably make men who like women, because I cannot necessarily relate to a man liking a man. Some players can play this way, not everyone can. So, the sexuality division will likely reflect its members to some degree. By saying that we should all become more "diverse," in my opinion, could alienate some people. If I'm a heterosexual male who just wants to make a heterosexual male, and now I'm more encouraged to make a gay male character, or a lesbian female, or an intersex character, and I have no basis or inspiration to play that character, it might be uncomfortable for me. It's no different than the issues you've placed with the gender "ban," really. If you want to make an intersex character, make one
This is entirely hypocritical and you’ve missed my point. We’re actually saying a lot of the same things. I’m saying that no one should have the right to push you into making a character you’re uncomfortable with making. As a pansexual, gender-neutral, leaning toward male person, I struggle with making heterosexual characters accurately and rarely feel comfortable with making them. Because I identify more on the male spectrum than female spectrum, I struggle with making women. Your point is mine. I’m saying that there is no need on either count. And if you’re going to try to make them equal, don’t be hypocritical and do it only with the sexes, but look at the sexualities, too. And in that right, I can’t make an intersex character -- because after making a guy “my next character should be a girl”.

If you label your character as "bi-curious," you should be allowed to express that freely instead of being lumped into a category that you feel your character does not belong just because it's a "state of being."

I’m just saying -- bicurious people usually don’t identify that way. If it’s less confusing for the members to place them that way, then that’s fine. As I stated, if a specific character needs shifting into another character I’ll do the numbers over once more. But seeing as it only shifted the numbers slightly, it won’t make much of a difference.

In closing, Nightmare is a wonderful place to play, and our moderators and admins all work so hard to make sure that everyone is happy and needs are met, and suggestions are heard. I'm happy to be a member of this community, and I don't see any real issues with the "suggestions" you've made, other than the one about the coding, which I understand is being looked into. The rest of it, until the ban is lifted, should stay as-is, in my opinion.

Personal feelings aside, all I’m asking is that everyone takes their personal feelings out of the equation and looks at this logically. What you’re asking me to do, in my discomfort, is the same thing you said you wouldn’t want to do to a heterosexual male.

I’m not angry or hurt or anything. Nor am I taking personal issue with this. I’m simply pushing for a better answer than “because” or “I’m uncomfortable” or “I just know it will be a problem”.

[JOSEPHINE OLIVIA CAMPBELL]

I appreciate you taking the time to respond, and since we have gotten a bit off-topic as to what the true issues here in this debate are, I'll do my best to keep this brief.

First and foremost, to address your response concerning the fact that some of my statements were 'ethnocentric' and stating fact that heterosexuals outnumber the number of homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, and transgender people in this country, let me say this: there will never be any way to know this for sure without forcing every living being to take pen and pencil to a giant survey. However, there are statistics out there that prove my point and not yours. I don't have enough free time to find three sources, but this one is quite credible and fascinating: williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf

Feel free to show your sources that state otherwise. I'd be more than happy to read them.

Next, I'd like to address your comments that I was being hypocritical. I do see your point on this issue, and withdraw my saying that people should be "forced" to create characters they are uncomfortable with making. They shouldn't. At all. However, you also stated that you don't disagree with my explanation of why Jurate instated the "ban" in the first place. There were too many men to the amount of women characters on the site, therefore action was taken. We both agree to this, and understand that was why the action was taken. For your comfort, I'll continue using the word "ban" even though I believe Jurate's intention was more of a suggestion than a "ban." Therefore, since a "ban" was placed in action because of logical reasons with a basis in the site that was shown in our site census, people are not allowed to make male characters past their first initial character (who may be male) until the "ban" is lifted. This doesn't say you may never make male characters again. The point of this "ban," truly, was to make the numbers more equal. Then, once the numbers were closer together, players may freely create male characters again. If you are uncomfortable playing a girl character for any reason, my recommendation, and what most people on this board would likely recommend is to develop your first character, plot with everyone on the board, get some good plots going, story-lines, etc, and then create a secondary male character (if such is your preference) after the "ban" has been lifted.

Take me for example: I was planning a male character when Jurate first instated the "ban." Instead of choosing to go ahead and make a male character anyway, even though one was already planned and existed in my mind, I made a female character. Up until now, my character history has been an even ratio of one boy to one girl in an alternating pattern. I broke my personal pattern to honor the rules: out of respect for Jurate and the needs of the site. And then I've been waiting, patiently, I might add, to create my next male character until the numbers were closer together, which they now are, and I expect the "ban" should be lifted shortly. Hence, this argument of the "ban's" existence is invalid.

Let's not get into the issues of natural selection, ethnocentrism, or gender-basis, shall we? It's messy and will alienate many people, and I'd rather not get into it. You asked for a logical argument, so let's stick to the facts.

Another issue you mentioned is the diversity on the site. I feel that our site is very diverse, but should only be so at the whims of the members. You should be allowed to make whoever you want, regardless of sexuality. Nobody here will limit that, unless the numbers and equality get out of hand. So please, make an intersex character. I feel that would be an interesting addition to the site. However, if you plan to make another male intersex character, you should follow the rules and wait until the "ban" has been formally lifted, as I have, and everyone else on the site has. Also, let's not get into putting "bi-curious" characters into either a "heterosexual," "bi-sexual," or "homosexual" quadrant when some players would be more comfortable keeping their character separated and staying true to what they feel the characters' needs and interests are. Let's call a spade a spade and not force anyone to do anything they aren't comfortable with, shall we? Since it's something I'm certain everyone here could agree upon.

Finally, I'd like to address your comments concerning the "plot" of this site. I agree whole-heartedly that every role-player approaches a site, regardless of plot for different reasons. Some are only coming for the romance aspect, some for the species aspect, some for the social aspect, and other modus operandis that I have not stated because, well, too many words. However, if you read the plot of the site carefully (it's in the top left corner under the 'welcome' sign), it states: "And through it all, each of them waits to find that special person . . . their soulmate.

Which being are you? What side will you join? And if your soulmate is a human, will you fight to be together? " This, to me, says that a major plot aspect is for characters to develop "endgames" or "finals" or "other halves" and "soulmates." If the numbers are unequal, this will be quite difficult for players to do, assuming this is one of their interests in creating characters for this board. I have a character who is asexual, and will likely not find a final. I have other plans for her. Jurate also has a character who fits these same terms, but many people, I hesitate to say the majority, but a decent majority of my friends and fellow role-players take joy in finding finals for their characters. By going against the moderating team's efforts to create equality in this site, you take away the joy of these people who wish to find "soul mates" for their characters by limiting their selection pool if they end up going with the "norm" and creating a heterosexual character.

So, let's maintain balance. Let's create amazing, diverse characters. And most of all, let's respect one another and not get involved in personal matters that don't need 'suggestions.' An old adage states: "if it's not broken, don't fix it." I don't see anything broken here. I see a happy, healthy community of friends, and your suggestions have been heard. Whether or not they choose to be put into action, however, is up to our moderating team, who I feel have done an excellent job for far longer than you or I have been on this site to decide.

[/justify]

[levi]

As I currently speaking with the head administrator of the site, I withdraw from this 'debate' and will speak with her and only her on this matter. This conversation is no longer relevant to me.

[DAPHNE SASHA ASTOR]

Okay, so. I consider myself an intelligent, logical, and quite open-minded individual- any and all are free to disagree on this point. I consider most members of this site to share those same characteristics- heck, it's part of why we join, in my opinion. I consider our admin to be fair and considerate and passionate about what they do; it's why Nightmare has lasted as long as it has. All of these things contribute to our closeness as a community, and why it is so much fun to play with these wonderful people.

I can only speak for myself, as I don't live in the heads of the other members, but I've never felt that any of the established rules or cycling bans have posed an issue. They are there to maintain the balance and the respect between players. Insofar as I can tell, they're working. We're happy and healthy little roleplayers with characters we adore. And I've never felt any stifling of my personal creativity. Yes, you may look at my characters and say 'Hey, the ban was working for her,' and that's true, because I've only made females, and intend to continue doing so. However, if that encouragement were reversed, I would happily abide by it, as I have been here long enough to understand the motivations behind it. But here's the thing, the bans never last forever (if the current ban hinders a character that is pending creation, one just has to wait and exercise a little patience before proceeding), and they will disappear and/or change as circumstances dictate. But not without some heavy deliberation and sampling of member opinions on the matter. Also, as CJ pointed out, I believe the word 'ban' was only used to draw attention, not actually crush somebody's hopes and dreams.

As for fluctuating, confused, or altered genders or sexualities that haven't yet been established: I feel that this point is mildly irrelevant. If someone were to create a character that didn't fit in a current box, the admin would be more than happy to create a new one for them. As a matter of fact, there is at least one case that I know of where this happened. Draw outside the lines all you like. I'm happy to see original artwork, personally, and I don't think anybody else would mind in the slightest. And yes, the site isn't an accurate representation of life outside its realm, so what? Its sole reason for being is a fun outlet for writers and the establishment of plots and storylines, which any bans implemented are only meant to encourage. So I believe a claim that the rules and/or bans are skewed/flawed is a bit uncalled for, and does come across- at least in my own head- as a mite rude, since there are reasons- especially the 'soulmate' facet of the site- that make such things entirely logical.