Feb 26, 2022, 11:04 PM
@greenflashlight I found it helpful in that it's nice to know that not everyone wants to give these ideas a pass. You're right that getting all yellow about the eyeballs isn't ideal.
GMs and Players
-
@il-volpe Actually, the more I think about it, the more I wish I hadn't posted that. As much as I hear and share your anger at some of the philosophies presented in this thread and the implications they have for both survivors of harassment and the enabling of harassers, lashing out like I did wasn't helpful to the overall argument I wanted to make; didn't (and couldn't) make anyone stop and think about how it feels to have their arguments taken to the dumbest possible conclusion; and on a personal level was just kind of beneath me.
Well, done's done, and I can't take it back. But I am sorry for that bitter, deeply unhelpful post.
-
@greenflashlight I found it helpful in that it's nice to know that not everyone wants to give these ideas a pass. You're right that getting all yellow about the eyeballs isn't ideal.
-
@devrex said in GMs and Players:
Verified that the page log history spans interactions back to the first pages exchanged on game.
I applaud all your efforts. Just FYI though that unrestricted page and scene storing can lead to performance issues, which may necessitate upgrading your droplet with more RAM. Deleting unshared scenes defaults to off because on most ares games it seems that most scenes get shared anyway and it won't matter, but that's going to depend on your game culture.
-
@faraday nods! Thanks for the heads up. I'm willing to buy more storage space if that's what it takes, that's not a huge concern to me, but that's good to know that as I'd briefly wondered whether it would become a technical issue.
He/Him
-
@devrex Honestly there may be some other issues since the page chat doesn't paginate or archive or anything. So if you have somebody you've been chatting with for 2 years it might just choke. I can look into that at some point, but it really wasn't designed to be stored indefinitely since most players initially freaked about the idea of it being stored at all
-
It is way more likely that a person reporting is mistaken than that they are deliberately manipulating data in order to get someone in trouble.
In the event that I was provided with evidence that someone was deliberately manipulating data in this way, I would ban them so fast their head would spin. There are few things I am more hardline about than OOC lying, though.
I strongly believe that deliberately false accusations are the outlier, however.
In my general experience, most disputants will exaggerate at worst, largely due to the magnification or distortion of their own memories.
-
@saosmash said in GMs and Players:
In my general experience, most disputants will exaggerate at worst, largely due to the magnification or distortion of their own memories.
There also comes the issue of differing experience levels. Someone having experienced, say, super bad times WORA-levels of abuse and mistreatment could view some 'casual' creeper bein' creepy levels as hardly anything worth noticing - whereas someone with limited exposure to abusive personalities would view it as the worst thing ever. Thus creating a disparity.
So while evidence of rule-breaking is important, we as staff/runners/people do have to be aware that different people will digest different levels of abuse differently.
He/Him
-
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
So while evidence of rule-breaking is important, we as staff/runners/people do have to be aware that different people will digest different levels of abuse differently.
This.
There is no one standard. Staff will employ what standards they are comfortable with. No one is owed a uniform standard of proof or process. Some will demand more evidence than others.
And that’s okay.
“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 GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
So while evidence of rule-breaking is important, we as staff/runners/people do have to be aware that different people will digest different levels of abuse differently.
This.
There is no one standard. Staff will employ what standards they are comfortable with. No one is owed a uniform standard of proof or process. Some will demand more evidence than others.
And that’s okay.
Even evidence notwithstanding, some people won't see X-thing as abusive, toxic, or bad, whereas others will. Perception of an event is important when considering events, as well as what actually happened.
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
He/Him
-
I can see different sides of this issue. I appreciate staff trying to make sure that something is true before acting on it or at least considering the possibility that sometimes it is the players who are complaining that are in the wrong. Sometimes all sides are in the wrong!
I also appreciate staff dealing swiftly and quickly with creepers.
The two don't always need to be in conflict.
One can take quick strong action against someone they are pretty sure is a serial creeper and also investigate more fully look at the nuisances where it seems like it could be ooc drama fueled by gossip, cliques and over reactions.
It doesn't really need to be one or the other. They often present very differently imo.
-
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
"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 GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
And, of course, one has to consider the source as well.
-
@tnp said in GMs and Players:
@coin said in GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
And, of course, one has to consider the source as well.
POOPYHEAD.
-
@coin said in GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
***Navy Seal Copypasta***
click to showHe/Him
-
Did this thread get moved? It says mildly constructive yet the last posts are 'poopyhead'.
I just wanted to reiterate there is no such thing as a RP emergency, and no one has ever been truly harmed by the inability to play on a RP game.
-
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
@coin said in GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
***Navy Seal Copypasta***
click to showI never click on spoilers.
"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 GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
@coin said in GMs and Players:
@tinuviel said in GMs and Players:
For example, if someone calls me mean things I'd probably handle that much better than another person. So what I'd consider abuse shouldn't be the totality of things when a player complains to me about an event.
Poopyhead.
***Navy Seal Copypasta***
click to showI never click on spoilers.
Me neither but as a former Marine I had a laugh. A navy seal in command of the entire usmc arsenal. Cute, almost adorable.
-
I dunno, "Poopyhead" is more constructive than some posts in these 11 pages.
-
@betternow said in GMs and Players:
@greenflashlight said in GMs and Players:
If a game's policy is that any claim of harassment must be proven with incontrovertible evidence, then that means we are comfortable beginning from the position that people who report abuse cannot be trusted, right? That they are liars or, at least, too mentally incompetent to understand what other players are doing to them. Since such people are so untrustworthy, their reports must be investigated, correct? That's the only reasonable thing to do. No one's saying they're liars, just that they can't be trusted.
That is not what anyone here has been saying. That's twisting words, and pretty much the EXACT kind of gaslighting they're referring to. I am sure I'll be chewed up for this but VASpider, DownwithOPP and yes, even Ruiz, all practiced this exact thing. It's how they get AWAY with abusing people, by turning the accusations onto the VICTIM, and having staffers BELIEVE THEM over the actual people they are hurting. By not asking people for actual proof of the abuse.
I speak from experience, and if Cobalt were still active she could confirm, that this is precisely what VASpider did on Darkwater, the first iteration of the game, where she literally told staff several players were being abusive to her. Those several players weren't even really interacting with her, and certainly not abusively, and had no idea of who she actually was.
This came down to an apology from Cobalt to me years later when Darkwater 2.0 was made, and a personal invitation to come play there.
I hope this helps with the distinction of "letting abusers run free" and "actually making sure the accused is the abuser".
It's true. And as I recall (but I barely recall, as it was long ago), staff looked into things and eventually got to the point where it was obvious that VASpider was the problem. Then we politely told her to leave, because she could not conduct herself in a manner appropriate for fostering the community we desired on Darkwater.
(Cobalt is alive and well, doing things other than mushing. Mostly taking care of a very large puppy.)
I have a playlist: http://musoapbox.net/topic/91/tributary-s-playlist
-
@tributary I wonder if people aren't kinda forgetting that VASpider, in their heyday, had, like, all the bona fides and then some. So if they were saying Abelard was abusive, you'd also have at least half a dozen Flying Spider Monkeys confirming it, and assorted fans saying, "I know VASpider, they would never lie about something like that," and very likely your own experience of an active, helpful, and fun-creating player who didn't seem like the sort of person who'd accuse someone they barely ever saw of harassment. So you might not believe Abelard at all. And if you did but there was a level of ambiguity or a common 'both of you have been dicks,' type situation, well, Spider had the goodwill points.
"... you'll find the story doesn’t end how you think, and the most important characters aren’t who you expect.” - Penny 40 to Derek, The Magicians S04E07 ‘The Side Effect’