MU and Alternate Channels

[Rook]

@Meg ouch.

I don't want to liken running a dog-fighting ring with political stance. One is "forgiveable" and the other isn't. To be clear, if someone was an unforgiveable piece of shit in the real world, I wouldn't want anything to do with them? That includes RPing.

Reasons for not associating with someone on a game:

• convicted sexual offender
• runs a dog-fighting ring
• long established history of OOC undermining and destruction to "friends"
• drives a Fiat

Non-reasons:

• Political stance
• Gender/Faith/Credo/Ethnicity
• inexperience with system, MUing
• typing ability (though this would be touchy after a while)

In general, I won't preclude someone from RP or a game if it is a protected hiring status type of thing. That's a pretty universal set of things that anyone should be safe in. That's an example.

[ThatGuyThere]

@Arkandel said in MU and Alternate Channels:

Does that sound like a good plan?

No that situation would be horrible but I would still not act. I can hate something but still feel it does not meet my requirement to act. I do not think spreading lies about someone is a good thing and if I was told Joe cheats on his wife I am much more likely to not rp with person telling me that, but as a staffer I would not act against it.

[Arkandel]

@ThatGuyThere Alright, fair enough. We can disagree about it.

In my book if something's hurting a game I'm responsible for I'm taking steps to fix it. No matter what it is.

[mietze]

If a person shows me certain ooc characteristics of themselves (misogyny, racism, bigotry against the lgbtq community, treating me like shit) then yeah I will limit my involvement with them--because if I know about it it's because they are fine with making gross comments oocly in front of me. In skype, on pub channel, in pages, etc.

I have cut people out or declined to do things with them on games before. It's my experience that toxic people really cannot hide their behavior for long. It will slip out on @mail or fb messenger or skype or whatever.

I don't feel particularly bad about it, since if they don't want me to know they're a freak or bigot then they should've kept their crazy under wraps better.

I do not stalk, wiki or otherwise, anyone because I think that's stupid. And those folks always show their ass eventually on their own. I don't need or want to pull down people's drawers until I find one.

[Meg]

@Rook

ok, but I have to admit. 'Drives a Fiat' had me laughing out loud at work.

[Rook]

@Meg Then it had it's intended effect.

[mietze]

I have not had to cite off game info on the few occasions I have involved staff in someone else's assholery or unwelcome behavior. It always comes out in game eventually. Now there may have been and often is many off game incidents as well, that I can cite as background info.

But assholes determined to be assholes can't help but be themselves. And really some people just are bound and determined to prove without a doubt they're an ass.

[Meg]

@Ganymede

I have no solutions, only problems.

More seriously, it is much tougher to figure out who is spreading rumors and if they are lies. You certainly wouldn't want to investigate such behavior until it was reported by the person the rumors were being spread about, and hopefully they'd have some idea of the person spreading them.

And if the person saying it claims it is true? I don't know. Nothing is cut and dry, for sure.

[Ganymede]

@Meg said in MU and Alternate Channels:

More seriously, it is much tougher to figure out who is spreading rumors and if they are lies.

Even more seriously, what if the person isn't spreading rumors and lies? What if it is the truth?

For example, what if I knew and could verify that Rook had run a dogfighting ring, so I told Arkandel this knowing that he would not RP with Rook any longer? I have spread no rumors, but I have affected Rook's game-playing, especially if his and Arkandel's PC are close.

[Arkandel]

@Ganymede I'd say the onus would be on you to prove this, else it'd be little more than libel.

But I don't know, at some point we're going to end up closer to doxxing than I'm comfortable with. Even if you can actually produce evidence about Rook's dog fighting ring, is it okay that you researched another player's real life to that extent in the first place?

[Paris]

If you know that a player is, er,
dogging a lot of players behind their back, especially if they are in ic conflict or the rumor-monger is staff, that is itself a big flag about their believability.

[Ganymede]

@Arkandel said in MU and Alternate Channels:

I'd say the onus would be on you to prove this, else it'd be little more than libel.

This isn't an issue of proof. You have to presume that it is true because the issue is: should staff take action if a player is telling truths to affect another player's RP.

Said another way, if I learned that Rex/Sovereign was playing on Fallen World and informed another player of this so that he/she would not RP with him, should staff take action?

[Meg]

@Ganymede said in MU and Alternate Channels:

@Arkandel said in MU and Alternate Channels:

I'd say the onus would be on you to prove this, else it'd be little more than libel.

This isn't an issue of proof. You have to presume that it is true because the issue is: should staff take action if a player is telling truths to affect another player's RP.

Said another way, if I learned that Rex/Sovereign was playing on Fallen World and informed another player of this so that he/she would not RP with him, should staff take action?

And yet, isn't that what we want people to do with VASpider, in some ways? Informing everyone who they are playing so that people can avoid them.

I get where you're going with this, and basically it really comes down to not being cut and dry. You really can't say 'i'd never take action on THIS' or 'i would take action on THAT'. It depends on the situation, to me. And who I want on my game, as I /think/ you have said in the past. (Maybe not you. It might have been someone else's point in another thread way back when.)

[Arkandel]

@Ganymede said in MU and Alternate Channels:

This isn't an issue of proof. You have to presume that it is true because the issue is: should staff take action if a player is telling truths to affect another player's RP.

But that's reframing the issue because my - primary - concern with it is the lying part; of course I want to know if a guy is Rex. I wanted to know Max was Custodius when I was told.

Circumstances do matters, but up to a point. For example if I'm stalking you, and you go to a new game hoping to keep a low profile but @Meg outs you to me then it's a nasty thing to do, but I wouldn't say it's an actionable one - unless she's staff, and she abused her position to do it.

Spreading false rumors and allowing the consequences of people's actions to catch up to them are two different things though.

[Ganymede]

@Meg

No, that's exactly what I'd say. It's your game; it's your rules; and it's your call.

[Paris]

@Ganymede I would not act on that. (Especially if the warnee wanted to avoid Rex.)

[Roz]

@Arkandel said in MU and Alternate Channels:

@Ganymede said in MU and Alternate Channels:

This isn't an issue of proof. You have to presume that it is true because the issue is: should staff take action if a player is telling truths to affect another player's RP.

But that's reframing the issue because my - primary - concern with it is the lying part; of course I want to know if a guy is Rex. I wanted to know Max was Custodius when I was told.

Circumstances do matters, but up to a point. For example if I'm stalking you, and you go to a new game hoping to keep a low profile but @Meg outs you to me then it's a nasty thing to do, but I wouldn't say it's an actionable one - unless she's staff, and she abused her position to do it.

Man, idk. If someone literally knows that Player A is stalking Player B and purposefully provides them information to help them do so? With full knowledge of what's going on? That'd be actionable for me, probably, depending on the circumstances. Because stalking is gross and shitty and people who help others stalk are also being gross and shitty and I wouldn't want that on my game.

[Arkandel]

@Roz It's really hard to establish intent. In fact you probably can't unless people own up to it.

Most of the real cases I've seen - not of stalking necessarily but more... people just not wanting everyone to know their secret identity for a while - have been just careless. A guy tells a guy in confidence, and then it spreads like wildfire, but it's not malevolent. It's just gossip.

However most of those cases originated from staff doing the telling, and that's always wrong.

[Roz]

@Arkandel Yeah, that's very fair. And I don't doubt that a lot of instances like that are probably just careless. But if I really had reason to believe someone did it purposefully with full knowledge of the situation, I'd consider it actionable.

[Rook]

I agree with Roz. Especially if I am doing so as staff on a game with a privacy expectation. It'd warrant at least a warning, for a staffer, and a stern talking to as a player to make sure that what they did was out of line with the policies of the game.

I would then take initiative and talk to the [alleged] stalker, simply telling them that I was made aware of certain things and that these and these are the policies of the game and my expectations of what constitutes good player behavior in that context. I would be clear that I understand that it is allegations, but even as allegations, I consider them worth a conversation.