GMs and Players

[Derp]

@il-volpe said in GMs and Players:

@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.

[Tributary]

@il-volpe Unfortunately for VASpider and their Flying Spider Monkeys, both Cobalt and I had been burned by their bullshit. So their arguments that they were totally just an active, helpful, fun-creating player who had little disagreements with a few mean people didn't work on us. We knew their game. We knew their style. And they did not appreciate being told, "We know what you are."

Because they absolutely thought they'd get away with things, just as you say.

[Derp]

@tributary said in GMs and Players:

Because they absolutely thought they'd get away with things, just as you say.

But they did get away with it on other games. How long did they basically run the Reach and its various iterations behind the scenes? I know they did similar on Haunted Memories. IIRC there was a game set in St. Petersburg that suffered from the same issue, though that one was shorter-lived.

Even as a known figure it got glossed over in favor of 'this is not my problem player look at all the fun she creates and all these people willing to back her play'.

So I think the original point still stands. As much as it might chap some people's asses to think you can't just take someone's word for something and bring down the hammer of god -- we've seen how that can go wrong. Even with highly visible examples, over almost a decade, over several games. The more subtle ones probably never get called out.

[Tinuviel]

@derp said in GMs and Players:

How long did they basically run the Reach and its various iterations behind the scenes?

---

In seriousntess, a lot of the examples above come from a desire from staff to 'be nice' or 'give a chance'. No, fuck that. If you fuck up so drastically that it makes @derp and I agree that you're a fuckwad, you don't get anymore goddamn fucking chances.

[3543thrh67]

The thing with Spider and a lot of abusers is that they are not obvious about it. My experience with Spider was that she isolated me from family stuff while acting like she wasn't doing it. She was not happy that I RPed with Dash from The Reach because she didn't like him. I forget the story behind it. There was a lot of 'I don't think you should RP with him but do what you want' while subtly attempting to not include me in stuff. When her lock out attempts didn't work on me she floundered while still trying to do it. It didn't really bother me not to be included in her stuff, I just did my own thing with no cares to what she did. I didn't notice that was what she was attempting to do until someone questioned why I didn't get involved with family stuff and another expressed they felt left out of family stuff. Then someone who dealt with her previously mentioned it was her tactic. I didn't care that she wasatt aattempting to isolate me but someone who does care about that stuff would have fallen victim and 'fell in line' so she would stop.

A lot of the times abuser types find a weakness they can prey on for someone and exploit it on a way it is hard to see while presenting the face of being a good person.

[reimesu]

The thing about VASpider is this: she's friendly, cheerful, personable, charismatic, helpful, kind, and will run lots of plot for you.

That's how she gets her minions. And staff friends.

And she's that way for a good long time, up until one day, someone does something that upsets her or she feels like she's been thwarted or she just feels like overturning the apple cart. And if she doesn't have any visible enemies, she'll turn on one of her own, and get all her minions to do the same. And suddenly, that person is being targeted with no clue why.

Sound familiar to anyone here? All of you people claiming that wanting evidence is evil? You're absolutely wrong. Because Spider had a way of making it so that even asking for the logs was 'mistrusting' her. And if you think other people won't do the same thing...well, I've watched it happen on other games.

"People are complaining," says Staffer A to the headwiz. They don't mention WHICH people. Just people. The headwiz decides to take action and come down hard on the person that "people" are complaining about without ever asking for evidence because Staffer A is trustworthy. Thing is, it's not "people." It's just Staffer A, who's having a bad day or a bad year or a bad life, or isn't getting enough attention that week, whichever. But because that staff is a closed circle and an echo chamber, no outside dissent comes into it.

Always ask for evidence. Trust, but verify. Don't assume that because someone is your friend, they're entirely objective and unbiased.

[krmbm]

@reimesu said in GMs and Players:

All of you people claiming that wanting evidence is evil?

Yes. All you people saying that? Best knock it off.

[Ganymede]

@derp

Yeah, St. Petersburg was quite an experience, but it did not fall due to her actions.

[Derp]

@ganymede said in GMs and Players:

@derp

Yeah, St. Petersburg was quite an experience, but it did not fall due to her actions.

I stand corrected then!

[MisterBoring]

So I had a thought on the original post (which I am posting without reading the entire 12 pages of this thread) and it goes something like:

I've seen many many cases in my many many years of RPing online (both in MUs and bboards and stuff), that there are always players who ignore all or most of the OOC information on the game and its related sites (beyond can I play character X type information), and that often includes details on how Staff approaches the game (availability, GMing style, preferred plot types, and so on), and then these players who ignore the available information will get upset when the game does not work the way they think it should, and throw fits, run PRPs specifically for the purposes of detracting from others play, and all manner of other bad behavior, all because they didn't bother to read the readily available OOC information on the game (again, beyond what they needed to read to make sure they could get their character approved).

And yes, there are definitely people who have staffed places who completely ignored everything their players told them OOCly in an effort to connect and tell a story everybody was invested in, so it's a two way street.

I'm not sure how to actually combat this phenomenon because it's specifically related to people just not going the extra mile to see how things fit together on a specific game. Maybe work on slapping that info on the front page of the game's website somewhere, or a big link to it. I dunno.

Can anyone think of a game that had or has a really good way of making sure players see that type of information fairly quickly (and even fairly often)?

Sorry if this is a rehash of previous stuff.

[Three-Eyed Crow]

@misterboring said in GMs and Players:

I'm not sure how to actually combat this phenomenon because it's specifically related to people just not going the extra mile to see how things fit together on a specific game. Maybe work on slapping that info on the front page of the game's website somewhere, or a big link to it. I dunno.

Having tried personally sending important thematic information to players in a personal job, as well as having it posted in normal places? No. No, I can't, and think it's just always going to happen, though one has to try to serve those who will read stuff somewhere as best one can.

[Arkandel]

@derp said in GMs and Players:

IIRC there was a game set in St. Petersburg that suffered from the same issue, though that one was shorter-lived.

I was in a Cabal with her at the time. When she found out my character wasn't meant to be romantically involved with hers... it did not go well.

I went to staff to complain. They did nothing. Staff designated to look into the issue literally came to the room we were both in and exchanged pleasantries and hugs with her.

So I left that MUSH. Following the incident when I tried to talk about it to people I knew their answer was "I don't want to get involved, you're both friends". Well, thanks I guess.

It's what it is. Years later everyone was up in arms about it, but at the time if you got in the way you were isolated and ignored - or at least that was my personal experience.

[MisterBoring]

@three-eyed-crow Oh yeah, like, really the only thing you can do is plaster the important stuff in as many places as you can and pray that the majority of people read it. Then you just get to hope that the people who don't read any of it aren't so selfish as to assume their OOC interpretation of how the game is run is correct.

[3543thrh67]

Because I think it should be discussed after seeing it mentioned on the Arx thread: Should staff be able to TS players, NPC or PC?

My thoughts are: It doesn't matter if they do or not. They should get to enjoy the game they created as well. In whatever the method is that they enjoy it. They should do their best not to allow that relationship to influence their decisions but at the end of the day staff are people not machines and it will. I would be surprised if anyone was capable of being bias free. I feel like everyone wants their friends to be good people and believe what they say. So, this can cause gut reactions of 'X is the liar because Y is my friend!'

Note, I am on the side that staff should not be held to a higher standard/treat being staff like it is a job. Staff are people playing in a hobby they are there to have fun in and escape the BS they get from their job/RL. IF they don't like actions X person does? Go for removing that player from their game. I mean if they are to heavy handed with that, they aren't going to have many people wanting/able to play on their game but that is their choice.

[EMDA]

@icanbeyourmuse said in GMs and Players:

Should staff be able to TS players, NPC or PC?

NPCs: In my experience with games, NPCs generally exist and are about to further a plot or setting. Staff accounts generally have expanded access to the game and to characters than regular players do, although the extent of that will vary from game to game. So you have a charbit dusted with the allure of somethingmorethanplayers, on an account with the ability to check characters/histories/plots/details out, using all that oomph to mudsex someone instead of further any of those general purposes. I find that creepy.

PCs: Sure, do what you want. Some of the same concerns from the above can seep into this territory as well if they're a known staff PC, but I think it's an area where staff's general reputation overall will inform the perception of what happens, and there's enough of a divide created from their identity as staff to allow for that engagement, even if it does invite rumormills about favoritism or whatever.

So if I hear some staffer is bedding down with someone on a regular character, I don't care (provided I don't get the overall sense that their intent in running the game is primarily to seek out TS targets, unless it's a game where that's a pretty on-the-label expectation, I guess). If I hear a staffer is using some fancy NPC on their staff handle to bed down a character, I'm ditching immediately.

[Ganymede]

@icanbeyourmuse said in GMs and Players:

Note, I am on the side that staff should not be held to a higher standard/treat being staff like it is a job.

This is where you lost me. Staff have more power on a game due to their access to commands that other players cannot. Enter the Spider-Man truism and power and responsibility.

Staff are people playing in a hobby they are there to have fun in and escape the BS they get from their job/RL.

If you want to play, then play; if you want to staff, then staff; but if you staff, people are going to expect you to play without bias; and if you are perceived as having bias then you should no longer staff.

[Kanye Qwest]

@ganymede said in GMs and Players:

If you want to play, then play; if you want to staff, then staff; but if you staff, people are going to expect you to play without bias; and if you are perceived as having bias then you should no longer staff.

No one in the world has ever done anything without bias.

[gremlinsarevil]

@kanye-qwest that's why its important to learn to recognize one's biases and staff can recuse themselves if a situation comes up where their bias would affect how they deal with a player.

MUSHes aren't paying staff. They're volunteers and need their own fun times too. If you're on a game where you can't trust staff to fairly enforce the games rules to all players, find a different game.

[Kanye Qwest]

@gremlinsarevil said in GMs and Players:

hat's why its important to learn to recognize one's biases and staff can recuse themselves if a situation comes up where their bias would affect how they deal with a player.

I do agree with this!

And the rest of it, idk why i only quoted the first paragraph

[Pyrephox]

I admit to having unease when a staff member regularly TSes players, especially on an NPC/obvious staff bit. I don't care about relationships as much, but historically, MU*s have struggled a lot with people using coercion, threats, and manipulation to get their horny text RP on, and while the stakes in an online game SHOULD be low enough that no one feels coerced -- they aren't, and people do. And it's something that really does need to be kept in mind.

Like it or not, there's a power differential there within the context of the setting, and I think it needs to be kept in mind. With NPCs, really just...fade to black would be my preference. Do what you want on your PCs, although be aware that if people know you're staff, some of them will try to get into your pants for the perceived extra bennies of being involved with you, and other players may end up feeling that they can't be honest about their desire (or not) to engage in a romantic relationship IC because they're worried about retaliation, whether that is warranted by your behavior or not.