The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc
-
@Pandora I mean, I think the analogy is actually the OPPOSITE of what you want, not close, because actors actually know ahead of time what is happening to their characters and they prep and rehearse for it. It would actually be more akin to the philosophy of sharing/warning OOC.
-
@Roz Ah, perhaps there's a miscommunication. The writers are Roleplayer A, as they are the ones writing the script. They give it to the actors who are Roleplayer B, who have to deal with what's been written as the roleplay partners in this analogy.
They might not like what's written, but they deal with it, without knowing 'Is this kidnapping plot going to lead to my death?' or 'Is Johnny cheating since my character seems to have seen a silhouette of him kissing Jane?' and so on.
They aren't always given reassurances about what's coming or explanations for what's happened, they just roll with the punches, something I wish more roleplayers were willing or able to do. What I wish doesn't matter one bit of course, but it's just my opinion.
-
I feel like it's one of those context things.
If you and your RP partner are doing the "IC only" thing, take it as it comes. If you and your partner are chatting about game stuff OOCly and you don't happen to being this up... little bit sketch, y'know?
-
Many moons ago when I was a friendly, OOCly chatty rp-newbie, I had a roleplay partner that said if my character cheated on his with a specific character, they'd be over. I agreed. Time passed, my character fell more and more in love with this specific character. One thing led to another, she kissed her. I told my roleplay partner OOCly, he said he understood, quit the game and never spoke to me again.
This doesn't have to mean anything, I'm just saying I could still have a friend if I'd just kept it IC.
-
re: cheating
Generally I like to be open and honest about stuff ic and ooc both. I typically don't plan for a character to get involved with another if they are supposed to be in an exclusive relationship but it sometimes just happens due purely to ic developments. Most of my characters tend to be poly as I am just not into jealousy and pissing matches in real life or in roleplay. This has caused a number of ic relationships to end early.
Ooc, I believe it would be dishonest and unethical to try and cover up if your character is cheating ic when talking player to player. Omission is fine, but deception is not. That creates a lack of trust and good communications. I neither offer nor expect any type of heads up or forewarning if there is the possibility of infidelity. Honestly, I would rather not know unless I ask, than be told. I don't want the ooc knowledge to fuck with my enjoyment of the in game events or skew my perceptions to be out of line with what my character would know.
-
I may have misread your post. I thought you meant that the players agreed to play out the link on Discord, and then played it out on game in violation of staff policy. I concur that if the activity occurred off-game, then there would be no need to police it unless the incest happened to make it into play somehow.
-
@Ganymede said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
I may have misread your post. I thought you meant that the players agreed to play out the link on Discord, and then played it out on game in violation of staff policy. I concur that if the activity occurred off-game, then there would be no need to police it unless the incest happened to make it into play somehow.
Yeah, that was more what I meant.
There are also games where the staff (to whatever "official" degree) isn't going to be looking into what two (or, y'know, more) players in a private grid room are getting up to. There are other games where staff can see anything happening anywhere on the grid. Case-by-case basis.
-
@insomniac7809 And in general staff can also selectively spy when they suspect rulebreaking behavior may be occurring. And so long as that's done with proper care that's also fine.
-
@DareDaemon said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
@insomniac7809 And in general staff can also selectively spy when they suspect rulebreaking behavior may be occurring. And so long as that's done with proper care that's also fine.
Ew, no.
Nonono.
If staff is ever going to have any sort of "spying" on their players (even the possibility of such) they need to have it in huge rainbow letters on the front page and repeat it after each step of chargen.
That's super creepy and if you're going to be that fucking creepy, please let me know ahead of time so I can not be there.
-
I would love to know what people are doing on MUSHes that require such privacy. The worst I can think of is like, scandalously hot TS or something, but even then it's just erotic fiction, we've all been there, seen that. I'm not opining that it's bad to want privacy, not to worry. I'm just saying I find it curious and amusing & I know that when I'm SRing and people ask me to watch their RP, they tend to go above and beyond with their writing, storytelling, and player cooperation.
Tinuviel about 9 hours ago
I hate you with the power of a thousand Pandoras. -
@Pandora Privacy is a right. It doesn't require justification, but taking it away does.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
@Arkandel said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
Privacy is a right. It doesn't require justification, but taking it away does.
I disagree.
You have no right to privacy on a MUSH. You have no right to be on a MUSH. The only right to privacy on a MUSH that may exists is a code of conduct which staff informs the players that they shall adhere to. I therefore concur that, generally, staff can spy on RP.
That said, within the hobby I think there is a valid presumption that staff will not spy on RP unless there is good cause for it. Whether that is enshrined in rainbow letters is largely irrelevant. If players discover that staff is spying on RP willy-nilly they will likely report it to someone, and that report will make it to some place public. As a result of the breach of the social agreement, there is a substantially likelihood that a lot of people are going to be pissed off.
I think it is well-advised that staff should probably post some sort of policy regarding privacy, and make it clear that, if there are to be circumstances wherein staff will watch RP, such circumstances are evident and socially acceptable. For example, I think that staff are justified to spying on RP if they have reason to believe there is a violation of game policy.
-
@Arkandel said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
Privacy is a right.
There's no such thing as a right, least of all on someone else's MU*.
Staff should note it down in a policy file: "If suspected of breaking the rules certain expectations of privacy may be violated..." or some such, but there are absolutely no rights. I would argue with @Ganymede, though on the "valid presumption" thing. At least in this section of the community, there's a definite expectation of some form of privacy, but we've seen enough complaints that we can't really presume it anymore.
I sure don't want my "privacy" violated, but I also sure want folks to have proof before taking action on complaints. I can't have it both ways.
-
I still like the old analogy that logging onto someone's game is like stepping into their living room. It doesn't become your house just because you entered it. If you start wandering around the house, it's perfectly reasonable that the host might want to keep an eye on whatever you're up to and make sure it fits with the values and the environment they've established in their home.
-
I'm not arguing whether there is a right or even an expectation. I'm saying that spying on other people's RP (where spying is watching them without their knowledge) is creepy as fuck behavior and if you, for any reason, including valid suspicions of cheating are willing and able to do so, you should to be up front about it.
That's all.
"Excuse the hell out of you. He's a bag of dicks. I'm a carefully curated box of cocks." -- to @GirlCalledBlu upon being misrepresented.
-
@Coin There's a big difference between being upfront and painting it in neon colours on the door, though.
He/Him
-
@Tinuviel said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
@Coin There's a big difference between being upfront and painting it in neon colours on the door, though.
We play in a hobby where people routinely choose not to read news files and, for example, things like Gray Harbor's 'don't you dare spoil Game of Thrones' had to be put in bright red in the connect screen.
So, like, neon colors, please.
Like I willa ccept some sort of plausible uninformed consent if it's in the news files and just not prominently displayed and people chose not to read--but being up front, IMO, requires you make sure the person is listening, not just muttering it and hoping they chose to listen to those words specifically.
It's the difference, IMO, between "honest" and "up front".
"Excuse the hell out of you. He's a bag of dicks. I'm a carefully curated box of cocks." -- to @GirlCalledBlu upon being misrepresented.
-
@Coin said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
We play in a hobby where people routinely choose not to read news files and, for example, things like Gray Harbor's 'don't you dare spoil Game of Thrones' had to be put in bright red in the connect screen.
So, like, neon colors, please.
It is never advisable to set policy based on the lowest denominator.
Anecdotally, I am fairly sure that most people expect privacy unless under suspicion. To think otherwise is a combination of naivete and willful ignorance.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
-
@Ganymede said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
@Coin said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
We play in a hobby where people routinely choose not to read news files and, for example, things like Gray Harbor's 'don't you dare spoil Game of Thrones' had to be put in bright red in the connect screen.
So, like, neon colors, please.
It is never advisable to set policy based on the lowest denominator.
Anecdotally, I am fairly sure that most people expect privacy unless under suspicion. To think otherwise is a combination of naivete and willful ignorance.
Man, I wish those people were the lowest denominator.
-
@Coin said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
@Tinuviel said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:
@Coin There's a big difference between being upfront and painting it in neon colours on the door, though.
We play in a hobby where people routinely choose not to read news files and, for example, things like Gray Harbor's 'don't you dare spoil Game of Thrones' had to be put in bright red in the connect screen.
Many if not all of these games have the tools to monitor specific players built-in. They are valid staff tool and it's one of the most reliable ways to get conclusive proof about rule-breaking behavior.
The reason people put spoiler policies so big and red isn't to help the person who is thinking of spoiling something. It's to make it less likely people get spoiled.
The only person who get hurt when staff makes use of an explicit policy that they will use additional monitoring if they have good reason to; while that person wasn't aware such an explicit policy, is the person who didn't bother reading the rules. At which point, well you should've read the rules.
The fact that people more likely to break the rules are also the ones more likely not to read them (can't follow rules you don't know exist, after all) is unfortunate, but that's all it is, unfortunate.
