Dec 12, 2019, 8:07 PM
Other people prioritize the comfort of the anxious over the comfort of the people making them that way. They have different priorities than you do. This is ok. I promise it is.
Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries
-
There is a difference between discuasing issues and 'this is bad stop talking about it'.
-
@Meg said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
you can be disrespectful while writing things respectfully. it's like how everyone dogpiled on faraday when she started talking about wanting to make a new MU* codebase with more web integration. she asked for opinions on doing that, but instead, everyone was like 'oh god you shouldn't do this at all it's horrible'. and sorry, that's not a respectful way to interact with a topic about ways to implement it.
"East coast people got a mean way of being nice, and west coast people got a nice way of being mean"
-Nathan, who makes my coffee. Wise man -
@Sunny said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
There is a difference between discuasing issues and 'this is bad stop talking about it'.
Fair ball.
-
Like seriously. If you go and look at the xcard thread I started a few months? ago, it is the same thing. A whole lot of resistance to the idea of assisting people with this type of comfort from a few key individuals who apparently find it offensive that other people are allowed to handle and care about things differently.
Eta: like I have no need whatsoever to see this implemented on a game where the creator isn't in to it. It probably isn't a great system for WoD given the source material, but -- I mostly play in other genres, and I'm not sure why something like this would be problematic for, say, a Harry Potter or Pern game.
-
Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
I don't think anyone has said that it should be standardized across all MUs current and in development so isn't this just like any other policy ever? Staff preference and willingness to take on extra work?
-
@Sunny said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
I just want to know why it bothers him SO MUCH that people are talking about addressing this issue. Like cool, he doesn't want the people who need a tool like this on his game, but there are plenty of games that actually do?
It bothers me so much because I legitimately don't believe that this is being used as a good faith measure.
It bothers me so much because as we continue to play in this hobby, I'm witnessing the normalization of a much more insidious form of manipulative social control, along the with the expectation that you aren't allowed to question it or disagree with it, while people ask for tools to empower it.
It bothers me because those of us who say 'wait, this is seriously open to abuse' get reminded that the form of abuse that we are most concerned about is being normalized and is much harder to detect than the abuse this tool is supposed to prevent, and we are not allowed to draw lines and say 'here, but no further' in a thread about people being allowed to draw lines and say 'here, but no further', which is the hypocritical high-water mark that most of us look for when looking to see if a discussion is actually being had in good faith and a tool is being asked for for its theoretical purpose.
That in a discussion thread about limits being put in place to prevent abuses, those limits are only allowed to go one way.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
Other people prioritize the comfort of the anxious over the comfort of the people making them that way. They have different priorities than you do. This is ok. I promise it is.
-
I think something like the initial 'red' is more or less only viable for one on one social scenes, to my thinking. I see little issue with it in that case, but I think I'd still implement it somewhat differently.
I would see value in something like a '+nope' command that:
- removes the character from the scene and drops them in the game's OOC Quiet Room
- emits a message to the room they were in to state: that something in the scene has exceeded their personal comfort levels, to carry on with the scene as needed if appropriate, and to allow the person who has removed themselves some time to cool/calm down before trying to speak with them about it
- pings the staff channel that this has happened, mentioning the name of the character who removed themselves and the other characters present at the time this occurred
Oh fucking well.
-
@Sunny said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
Other people prioritize the comfort of the anxious over the comfort of the people making them that way. They have different priorities than you do. This is ok. I promise it is.
You don't actually read a single thing I write, do you?
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@Derp said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
You don't actually read a single thing I write, do you?
The problem as presented says people are open to be abused, how can we help them, what systems can we use. And you're saying, any system you implement can be abused, lets not do anything.
From the standpoint of rhetorical argument, you're not contributing to the discussion constructively. It can all be abused, we've established this. How do we address the former if the latter is not a solution? And if you don't think the former is a problem, start another thread, this feels like derailing.
-
Yes. I read it all. I am not going to go point by point because the fundamental difference here is perspective and priorities, which until you acknowledge that the topic itself has value -- like, not to us, but to yourself -- there isn't a point.
-
@surreality I have to admit, I don't know why it needs to ping the staff members. Assuming that the people who were in the room weren't doing anything wrong or against the rules, they just stepped into a situation that was outside of someone's ability to play, then there's not really anything to inform staff of?
If they were purposefully trying to pressure a player into something, or doing something against the rules, or anything like that, it needs to be flagged up/requested in a different way.
-
@Derp said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
the form of abuse that we are most concerned about
Here is your issue.
The form of abuse you are most concerned about is not the same as the kind of abuse people in this thread are most concerned about.
There is no happening on a game that is worth traumatizing a real human being, full stop.
No one is demanding that you not remove players from your game that are not a good fit for it, whatever your game may be. No one is demanding you adopt any of these methods.
You are seeing people finally give a shit about the idea that human beings are actually important, which is not something that has been traditionally the case. Only a handful of years ago, when Rex first showed up on Reno and brazenly bragged to a member of staff there (HI!) about how he loved WoD games because they were full of emotionally damaged female PLAYERS that he could OOCly manipulate into doing whatever he wanted, only one member of staff (HI AGAIN!) thought this was something worthy of paying any goddamned attention to or possibly take any action about, even when he started to drive players off of the game through IC and OOC harassment.
This was not forever ago. That isn't ancient history. It is still the norm in many parts of the hobby.
I give a much bigger fuck about that than I do Miss Never Goes to Jail, because one is annoying, and the other is doing real harm to real humans. So, yes, that is my priority, and it sure as shit ain't changing.
Meg: In part, it's the abuse factor, and tracking. If somebody is constantly ducking out of scenes? If various people are constantly ducking out of scenes when they're alone with Bob? This information is pretty useful to staff.
I could also see something like +nope being used in group scenes/plots/etc. If something genuinely triggering to a player pops up on the screen and someone is having a panic attack or flashback? It happens. People may need to check in re: how to proceed, or staff may need to ask the player about how to handle consequence X, inform them of the outcome, etc. if an intermediary is ultimately required. It's like fading one person's presence in a scene with details to be determined after a cooldown period while others carry on as able, vs. everything in the scene fading out or coming to a halt.
Oh fucking well.
-
@surreality said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
If somebody is constantly ducking out of scenes? If various people are constantly ducking out of scenes when they're alone with Bob? This information is pretty useful to staff.
Fair point. I was thinking about it from an aspect of like, no one really has done anything wrong. But as a metric and tracking, it'd be fair to see.
#FreeFarfalla
-
I'm honestly mystified about what abuse cases we are concerned about from people using a command to indicate the need for a ftb. In my experience of ftb, the events still happen offscreen. So if I reach a point in a scene where I'm uncomfortable and I slam a button saying I need a stop, maybe you don't get to ask me why I need a stop but perhaps we still need to communicate what is being established off cam?
I agree w/Meg about staff involvement. Reporting seems necessary only if there's an issue that can't be resolved between players.
-
@saosmash but you won't have had to personally sit through them, and RPed them!! that's abusive!
-
@Meg I mean, it could even have something like a +nope/rl flag version with a 'oh shit RL just exploded I need to go right now' message, if, say, you suddenly looked outside and saw your shrubbery was on fire and do not feel like taking time to write out an explanation of why you need to duck out at record speed.
Not like that's ever actually happened to me only to have the person scream at me for idling on them when I finally got back or anything...
-
@surreality said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
The form of abuse you are most concerned about is not the same as the kind of abuse people in this thread are most concerned about.
There is no happening on a game that is worth traumatizing a real human being, full stop.
So @surreality had a lot to say here, but I really want to call this out. THIS IS THE POINT.
Yes, there are people that absolutely can abuse this sort of system, but what are they going to accomplish with that abuse?
Being irritating.
This sort of system is not being discussed to address irritation, it is being discussed to address harm.
ETA: The reason I have not addressed the topic of being concerned that the hobby is going in this way is that I have no way to express my objections to 'we care about harm to human beings now' being a problem in a fashion that is appropriate outside of the hog pit.
ETA2: Who seriously cares if someone uses +nothanks to get out of a rape scene if they aren't actually traumatized? WHY IS THIS A PROBLEM?
-
Let’s dial it back a bit, please. All of us.
-
@Sunny said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:
ETA: The reason I have not addressed the topic of being concerned that the hobby is going in this way is that I have no way to express my objections to 'we care about harm to human beings now' being a problem in a fashion that is appropriate outside of the hog pit.
In fairness, I remember the infamous Rex/Sovereign thread. I remember just how many people were utterly incredulous that someone like him even existed and that this shit was actually real, not whiny hyperbole from women being too emotional or histrionic, which is how people treated these reports for nearly twenty years. (And, again, plenty of places still do.)
The Rexes, Ravauns, Jeurgs, DownWithOPPs, etc. do tremendous damage, and frankly, it's invisible to a lot of people that are not in their target demographic.
It is way easier and more comfortable to believe the complainer is just oversensitive.
Guess what: they're really not. These people are around, and they are real. They will grief, threaten, bully, neg, demean, play victim, etc. all specifically in order to get the things they want out of people in ways that make people doubt themselves or the validity of their discomfort. They'll call you a 'bad player' if you're not down for that rape scene, or being forcibly impregnated. They'll insist 'you agreed to dark and that's dark, you have no leg to stand on in your objection'. They'll try to force the issue through code. They will proactively contact staff in some cases to say 'so and so is starting drama' when you tell them NO, or act like they are so fucking magnanimous if you say 'NO' to their egregious bullshit and they don't press the issue -- "THIS TIME".
I'mma go calm down.
