@Ganymede Seriously, I must be wearing a sign: Persistent creepers with unannounced fetishes, inquire within! That look of shock and horror on my face just means I'm totally into it!
I would like to spend less life hours like this:
...and I know I'm not alone here.
That's the Jeurg story, and it was about 3 years back now I guess? Which, as we all know now, is best resolved by way of get rid of Jeurg. Not helpful if you had no idea who he is/was.
Plenty of other people pulled similarly skeevy garbage in the same period of 6-8 months or so, with the same 'defense', and plenty of people I spoke to had similar experiences to mine. So, unfortunately, yes, this still happens, and it did not vanish in the 90s.
Sometimes staff was awesome; they were willing to boot someone who was reported, and though they requested to be frozen at the same time, apparently, I'm pretty sure if they hadn't asked, it was going to happen anyway. Other times, the same 'it's a non-consent game, deal with it', even if it involved some really shady and suspicious bait and switch, or 'we don't need dice, don't worry!' (we totally did need dice 
).
I have no reason to believe people aren't still doing exactly this kind of crap, because there is no time over the 20+ years I've been playing that I haven't run into them. I have heard too many people share similar stories. Many have only shared them privately in page on a game or in PMs here on the forums after I've said something and will say flat out they don't feel safe even posting about their experience here on the forum, let alone reporting on the game, for a variety of reasons.
Should they speak up? Yes, I think they should. At the same time, I can only encourage them to do that so much before it starts to become bullying, from my perspective, and some people I've spoken to over the years have even mentioned this: that their friends push them to report it to the extent that they feel attacked on all sides and without support. Or the friends report it and they get dragged in when all they wanted was for this to go away or to have never have happened in the first place.
I adore the shit out of you, @Ganymede, but -- and this is not an insult -- this is a very different personality type from yours in many cases; you're very self-assured, confident, and willing to speak up. Not everybody is comfortable with this in the same way, or in the moment, and this is all I mean here. I can get why this seems really alien to you that people aren't just doing this in the way you're describing they should. I really do agree that people should be willing and able to speak up, but -- and this is critical -- people have different comfort zones here. Some people will speak up on a game that doesn't even say anywhere that you can, others won't without a real culture of it as a common thing supported by policy and reporting methods and transparency of punishments --
and some people will or will not be more likely to speak up or report based on any one of those three example things, too, for any number of reasons.
You have your solution, and I applaud that. I very strongly encourage others to embrace it, in the same way that I think players should inquire if there's a reasonable expectation that one of their specific sensitivities may come up in the course of an event/PrP/scene and they can't tell as @faraday describes, too.
I just also think that if you know you are, or are likely to, include rape, torture, child abuse, or a similar common major trigger in your event, PrP, or scene, you should mention this in the event announcement so people sensitive to the content can self-police by opting out, and people are prepared to engage with this content. I believe that providing tools and methods to foster communication are helpful. I get it; you don't need them. That doesn't mean they aren't, or cannot be, useful and helpful to others.
From game to game, what's useful is going to vary. Something that covers all the necessary bases for a setting like WoD is going to be way over the top for many other games. This is common sense, right?
So how's it different from person to person? We are not all the same, and we are not just collections of points on a sheet like a character is. Why would a 'one size fits all' solution work any better here?
That solution is what we already have now and I am telling you in no uncertain terms that it has absolutely failed people, and not just because they're cowards or irresponsible jerks who won't speak up/etc. or because they are somehow flawed in a way that makes them unfit for participation in the hobby.
Some feel intimidated.
Some feel they will be abused more if they speak up.
Some feel staff will punish or humiliate them if they report, or even speak up in the scene, and then get reported as 'the problem'.
Some feel they will be harassed or chased off the game.
There are lots of other possibilities here and here's the problem: we know these things have absolutely all happened and we've talked them to death over the years when they do; people who are not as comfortable by default typically have a reason for it that doesn't come down to being an irresponsible jerk who figures the warning didn't apply to them and charged in then started whining later, or that they're just too fragile a snowflake to properly function in the real world.
You've spoken about wondering about the people who just quietly leave because of these issues? See above; leaving was easier for them than they felt, for whatever reason, that conversation and the potential consequences of it would have been.
This problem is sincerely an immense and complicated one with a lot of moving parts. "Speak up, period" and "Ask, period" actually require more elaborate underpinnings than it may appear at first.
(I'm not trying to drag you back into this conversation, @faraday, and you are being used exclusively as a positive example here.) Look at @faraday's system. There are actually a number of reasons that is much more likely to work on her game than it is on a game like TR or FC or another large, sprawling staff, many many GMs, sort of game.
- She's running all the staff work. She knows what's going on. There is no he-said-she-said amongst staffers, staff-shopping, or unknowns on the staff side. The amount of shady garbage cut out of the loop by this is big, and the amount of trouble caused by completely innocent miscommunications or omissions amongst staffers when resolving an issue is even more huge, because it's much more common. This makes a big difference in the end result.
- She's running the main events and plots. (I think?) She knows who has inquired about what and when. She has also mentioned in other threads that she cares enough about her players that if there's a subject she knows is worrisome for someone, she will do her best to be mindful of not throwing that in their face herself, and will steer others away from that subject within reason. (There was a baby seal example in another thread about this, from what I half-recall at this hour.) That is a real demonstration of 'give a damn' and not everybody does. Also, again... one person running things. The amount of confusion or manipulation or 'did everybody get the memo?' is cut down dramatically, and this makes a huge difference in the end result in a whole bunch of ways.
- She's seeing all the interpersonal issues that are reported and is aware of them. All of them. They're not filtering in through a variety of staffers who may or may not pass the information along and while there's still probably always going to be second hand reporting of issues by friends of people who had an issue, it's still a whole lot less 'game of telephone' and that means problem children become much more obvious, much more quickly, and she has a well-earned reputation as someone who is trustworthy and won't put up with people being abusive toward each other on her games. This is super huge, and yep, it makes a big difference, too.
So there's a lot going on there that isn't immediately evident in the specific resolution policy/method for these issues that has a real impact on the end result.
Change just one of those things, and you'll see what I'm getting at here, most likely. For instance, now picture swapping out @faraday with Elsa. Would you think the same approach would work just as well with Elsa at the helm? What about one of the old school 90s legends of crazy?
) to be able to play a racist character without being racist myself.
