@faraday said in Privacy in gaming:
I put together a general privacy article for Ares games if anyone's interested. (Feel free to send me any comments on things I've missed, explained poorly, etc.)
In the next patch it'll be available on the games themselves in 'help privacy'.
stop being so proactive and making the rest of us lazy bastards look bad.
What privacy is it that people are looking for?
The first one is the one that I would consider important, this is why I use a VPN, disposable email, etc. The second one I prefer if staff has access to, in no small part because theme creep annoys the ever-loving shit out of me and I find that nipping shit in the bud is so much more effective than having to steer the whole damn ship back on course after hitting the iceberg of bullshit. The third one I couldn't care less about because they're more for administrative purposes like arranging scene times/dates or filling people in on what they missed or talking about how the first episode of The Mandalorian was trash except for the last 10 seconds.
If it's not too much trouble, can someone give me an example from either the second or third category (or both if something comes to mind) of something you imagine that you or another hypothetical player would feel violated about if you found out staff had read it?
@Pandora said in Privacy in gaming:
If it's not too much trouble, can someone give me an example from either the second or third category (or both if something comes to mind) of something you imagine that you or another hypothetical player would feel violated about if you found out staff had read it?
It's not really the content of them that most would feel violated by, but the sheer fact that someone "unauthorised" had read them. Like going through someone's phone without their permission.
He/Him
@Pandora I can really only think of a few things from category three. And it was less that someone read them and more what they did with that information (copy and pasting it to third party individuals or sites, or threatening to). Mushing is a social hobby. As a result, people do hook up RL via it pretty regularly. While I think the vast majority of times its between people who are single/open, sometimes it isn't. Or it's a hookup where even so, one party might not want it publically known that it happened (which is kind of gross, but whatever). As a staffer I've had to deal with someone threatening to in essence blackmail someone with information/screenshots that looked as if they had been pulled by some sort of staff access (since the person was trying to threaten both parties and wasny involved). People like to gossip about other people's relationships/statuses (one of the reason why anyone badmouthing their own RL partner as a sympathy ploy is likely to make me nope out--thats a huge red flag) and sometimes they will share private communications as a means to do so, including things that sometimes look like someone has been given access or screenshots to something that was not meant for them.
I think as staff if you decide to crack into ooc private/individual communications between players theres a high degree of risk that those individuals will feel violated even (and perhaps even especially) if they never disclosed any RL ooc info or hijinx and no game violations were found. I do not think anyone should expect that staff can't do that (and I think many people would like then to take that action /for cause/). But I do think that most players expect staff will not do it unless it's a last resort, and so will feel violated if they find out and feel like it wasnt a strong enough cause.
@mietze said in Privacy in gaming:
As a staffer I've had to deal with someone threatening to in essence blackmail someone with information/screenshots that looked as if they had been pulled by some sort of staff access (since the person was trying to threaten both parties and wasny involved).
But was this situation a result of staff being able to see the conversation, or was the third-party a non-staffer? Because if it was a non-staffer, then staff being allowed to see it wouldn't have changed the situation in any way.
But I get it, people are using PMs for conversations where it'd be much more intelligent to have off-game via a platform where you can erase your messages. I guess that would make me wary of staff reading my stuff as well, if I was up to no good.
I think in those cases, @mietze, you just need to ban literally everyone involved for your own sanity. That's just a hot steaming slice of nope pie with fuckthat sauce.
Privacy is valuable in and of itself. It might not have value to you, but to pretend that it only is valuable to anyone if they are misbehaving is inaccurate. Recognizing when other people have different values than you without immediately assuming those values are lesser is really helpful when having these sorts of conversations.
@Sunny said in Privacy in gaming:
Privacy is valuable in and of itself. It might not have value to you, but to pretend that it only is valuable to anyone if they are misbehaving is inaccurate. Recognizing when other people have different values than you without immediately assuming those values are lesser is really helpful when having these sorts of conversations.
I'm sorry, but at what point did I say or insinuate that it doesn't have value to anyone? I was very clear that I was speaking my own opinion & asking for clarification of the opinions and stances of others, and I even deleted a post I made that read to me as if I was casting doubt on someone's perfectly valid personal preferences.
I guess that would make me wary of staff reading my stuff as well, if I was up to no good.
My apologies if this wasn't intended to imply that the objection is because people were up to no good.
@Sunny said in Privacy in gaming:
I guess that would make me wary of staff reading my stuff as well, if I was up to no good.
My apologies if this wasn't intended to imply that the objection is because people were up to no good.
@Pandora That does seem to read in a vein of "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."
He/Him
@Tinuviel I tend to be wary of 'if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear' because most often, it is an argument presented by those whom you really do want to hide things from; insurance companies, advertising agencies, and social media selling data to whoever wants to to influence politics and elections.
As always, the issue isn't really whether someone gets off on watching someone else write about celeries and Madonnas with ze big boobies, as much as it's about risks of stalking, doxxing, and other harassment. The only filter that actually -works-, though, is the one between hands and keyboard. If a MU has a policy and instructions on what to do when players or admins break rules, that's... probably all we can do.
http://keys.aresmush.com -- Come to Chincoteague, we have ponies.
@L-B-Heuschkel It's always a fallacious argument. I don't always know what it is that I'll need to hide from moment to moment, especially when it comes to law enforcement or other government apparatuses - or in this case, the whims of unpredictable human beings with anonymity and authority. So it's far more preferable to be able to hide whatever I choose whenever I choose for any reason I choose.
@Sunny said in Privacy in gaming:
I guess that would make me wary of staff reading my stuff as well, if I was up to no good.
My apologies if this wasn't intended to imply that the objection is because people were up to no good.
Me. I was saying that, considering my lack of concern currently with being spied on by staff, I would likely not have that same lack of concern were I to engage in bad behavior. I'm not saying no one else is entitled to feel the way they feel, just being self-centered and talking about myself.
@Tinuviel said in Privacy in gaming:
@Pandora That does seem to read in a vein of "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."
That is in essence my opinion, that staff having a policy of watching everything & doing so would not, in theory, be problematic for anyone with nothing to hide. I'm perfectly aware that plenty of people who presumably have nothing to hide are more concerned with the principle of the thing; I don't understand why and haven't read any argument for it other than 'just because'.
Cool; I generalized where it wasn't intended, and I'm sorry about it.
ETA: Thank you for clarifying.
@Pandora said in Privacy in gaming:
I don't understand why and haven't read any argument for it other than 'just because'.
"Just because" is a perfectly reasonable argument when it comes to how people feel. People will feel violated, just because. People will feel insulted, just because.
But, in my case, it takes away my ability to decide who knows what about me. If I tell you, for instance, the names of my children and you then elect to tell others, I would feel violated because I should get to decide who knows that. The same principle applies to information conveyed between two people and intercepted by a third party. I didn't get to decide if I wanted them to know that information, whatever it happens to be.
ETA: When it comes to personal feelings like this, nobody needs to understand why. They just have to understand that it is.
I was debating this as length last night with my partner (because of course I was), and what we came back to on this one is that it really boils down to a consent. I consented to let someone else read X; I did not consent for a different person to do so. When my issue stops being an issue for me is when the issue becomes big enough that it overrides the importance of my consent to me.
My privacy is mine, like my hand is mine and I don't want you to touch it if you don't have permission UNLESS you are, say, grabbing it to pull me out of the way of a semi truck I didn't see.
@Sunny How the fuck did I forget the word consent?
@Sunny I overreacted a bit as well, it's easy for a thread to lose the plot over small misunderstandings.
@Tinuviel said in Privacy in gaming:
"Just because" is a perfectly reasonable argument when it comes to how people feel. People will feel violated, just because. People will feel insulted, just because.
Totally, I just mean my own stance will never be changed via an argument of 'just because', even if it's well within your rights to feel the way you do.
@Sunny said in Privacy in gaming:
I was debating this as length last night with my partner (because of course I was), and what we came back to on this one is that it really boils down to a consent. I consented to let someone else read X; I did not consent for a different person to do so.
@Tinuviel said in Privacy in gaming:
@Sunny How the fuck did I forget the word consent?
@Pandora said in Privacy in gaming:
That is in essence my opinion, that staff having a policy of watching everything & doing so would not, in theory, be problematic for anyone with nothing to hide.
Emphasis mine; I am talking about staff watching everything while having informed everyone that this is in fact their policy to keep things in line or what have you.
@Pandora If staff has indeed put 'we can and will watch you' in the terms of service, not hidden under sixty pages of legalese, then I as a player will not object to be watched. I will probably find another game to play, but I -will- have consented by logging in, so to speak.
http://keys.aresmush.com -- Come to Chincoteague, we have ponies.
@faraday said in Privacy in gaming:
I put together a general privacy article for Ares games if anyone's interested. (Feel free to send me any comments on things I've missed, explained poorly, etc.)
In the next patch it'll be available on the games themselves in 'help privacy'.
stop being so proactive and making the rest of us lazy bastards look bad.
