Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries

[Ghost]

@Ganymede +warn was good stuff.

[mietze]

It might, but personally I think the coded tool sends a message that staff supports it and will take things seriously when they need to be.

A policy is easy to write. Many times these policies are written (often unintentionally but not always) in a way that implies that if you go to staff it is because you've failed at adulting and if the MUST involved themselves in your inability to be big boys and girls then here is how that will roll out. Or frankly, staff gives that impression.

That could happen with a coded tool too. But there was effort expended up front to make it available, which sends a stronger message.

Or maybe it wouldn't. Will have to see how it plays out in places willing to give it a try. Though I suspect on a game where staff is friendly to the notion that sometimes they will need to sort out something like this, and will do do without begrudging it that the people who abuse it either way will not stay around because they'll be caught out and it's not a friendly environment for them.

[Sunny]

@Kanye-Qwest

I got this one. If a coded command is simple and easy to use, does NOT come with the expectation that I have to explain myself, and most importantly I have seen other people use it and it has played out to work as intended, yes. At least for me, it would remove the parts that trigger anxiety. Now, I actually speak up just fine these days, but that is only after a whole lot of RL coaching about unrelated stuff that happened to make a difference.

[Pandora]

@Kanye-Qwest It'd be awesome if anyone else that that has struggled with this issue felt cool coming forward to give their opinion on it, I know @Kestrel posted earlier about their experience, which falls pretty squarely within the lines of what I mean to address, namely the fact that current policies tell people that they have recourse to assert themselves, but generally do not have a streamlined, game-wide accepted process by which to do so.

Saying 'Hey could we not?' is a passive inquisitive & invites further discussion, leaving one open to being pressured, coerced, or worse - having your concerns twisted into a narrative they can then use to vilify you.

As someone with firm boundaries, I often opt to throw the game out with the bathwater when I see drama headed my way these days because I apparently suck at OOC communication; I type words when people are upset & they almost invariably make things worse. It'd be nice to be able to just throw out the drama without exchanging words further. Sometimes in text-based games, the less words, the better.

[Kestrel]

@Kanye-Qwest said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

@Pandora It's a good thread, and a good thing to have a discussion about. I wish we could get a group of people who are not comfortable telling others "please don't do this/contact me/whatever boundary" and see what they would feel comfortable doing, because that's my hurdle.

Isn't any coded tool you give them to use in the moment, in scene/conversation essentially the same as saying 'hey could we not'? If the aversion is fear or wariness of conflict or insulting the other party, would throwing a card on the scene not trigger the same anxiety?

I feel like the more something is coded into the game and thus totally normalised, the less of a big deal it seems to use it. Especially if it cuts out any need for actual human interaction/communication, which can be like, hard, for some people.

There's a MUD called After Earth which has a "graphic" command which I think is a pretty neat idea:

Helpfile for Graphic

Class: Command
Syntax: graphic

Graphic is used to indicate that you are uncomfortable with the content of the RP, either due to its violent nature, sexual content, or some other reason which would justify omitting, editing, or otherwise toning the RP down to a more acceptable level.

When this command is used, all persons in the room should comply and reduce the level of detail. It should not require clarification or lapse into OOC discussion.

See also: MUDSEX, TURNS

Mudsex (TS) is also never supposed to occur without use of a "consent" command.

Helpfile for Consent

Syntax: consent list
consent give <name> [note]
consent revoke <name> [note]
consent alert <name> <reason>
consent check <name>
consent request <name> [reason]

All players are required to seek and obtain consent prior to engaging in sexually explicit roleplay.

The consent list command lists all characters that your character has provided consent to. Consent give <name> will add a character to the list, with an optional note if desired. Consent revoke <name> will remove consent at any time, also with an optional note.

All players are required to confirm that they have received consent before pursuing sexual intercourse using the consent check <name> command. Likewise, a player can OOCly declare their character's IC intentions with consent request <name> with an optional reason.

The consent system is PRIVATE. It does not report to staff unless a player uses the consent alert <name> <reason> command to tell staff that something is wrong.

See also: MUDSEX

All good stuff, IMO. Reading these help files significantly increased my immediate level of comfort and confidence in deciding to play this particular game.

Just having these kinds of policies documented, knowing there are very strict, specific systems in place that don't require me to go through the (perceived to be) taxing process of reaching out to and then negotiating with staff.

I will also say that staff reputation goes a long way. I don't play Arx; theme-wise it's just not my bag, I'm not into L&L stuff. But I've only heard good things from friends, who inexorably gossip because that's just kind of the way it goes in this community, which means that if I did decide to play Arx I would probably feel a lot more comfortable approaching its staff about any potential issues.

It's not often that I agree with @Pandora on anything and honestly it's kind of surprising that of all the possible topics on MSB, this is where the line appears to get drawn between me, the popular community consensus, and her, based on past experiences. But for example, I can't think of any situation where it would ever occur to me to reach out to the staff of Haven to express that I'd encountered an issue with another player, as they have a notoriously bad reputation when it comes to dealing with this. (Unless I specifically just wanted to raise a stink up about it without any expectation that they'd actually do anything on my behalf, for cathartic/venting purposes.)

EDIT: Although speaking of Haven, I like the difficult prisoner system.

I have to wonder if the pushback from some of the people on this thread like @faraday (hi, sorry, I'm your biggest fan but your responses here just baffle me) may also be somewhat game-culture based.

If you're exclusively active in the kinds of WoD games that get circulated and advertised on MSB, maybe you can't fathom why it can kind of seem like a big deal to reach out to someone, or to staff, and let them know there's a problem. Maybe you're used to playing exclusively with people you've known for years, and pretty much the only circumstance you'd encounter where someone might need to reach out is akin to a buddy nudging you with an elbow and giving the stink-eye to some strange newcomer who doesn't seem to be doing things the way we do things around here.

But then picture someone like me — I generally feel like more of an outsider in this community, as I don't exclusively play MUSHes and came across my first MUSH only a few years ago — it can be pretty awkward to speak up, as the newcomer, in a circumstance where I might worry that I could be perceived as stirring up trouble in an established community.

Furthermore, on a lot of non-MUSH MU* that I play, OOC communication is seen as a bit of a bigger deal, in that it generally shouldn't happen without very good reason, and may even be an opt-in system. I like this because tbqh I don't come to these games to socialise, I come for pretendy-fun-times and to do what I love most in this world (other than maybe cuddling cute animals), which is creative writing. Having to actually talk to other players via pages to set up a scene or whatever is just a hurdle that I feel obligated to surmount, not something I would actively choose to do for the hell of it, 99 times out of 10. (That is not a typo.)

The culture on MUDs etc. may often also actively stigmatise the idea that you're even allowed to be uncomfortable with a scene. Like, don't be a baby, this is a mature game, a mature community, you need to buck up and just be OK with whatever the game throws at you. Also whatever happens IC is IC and you're not allowed to try and control your game experience through OOC means. Don't want your character raped? Have your character fight back, or report the incident IC to a police character, don't just bitch about it OOCly.

Just telling people in games with these kinds of cultures that it's actually OK to not want to deal with something, and giving them a command to put on the brakes without needing to figure out how to actually express that could be kind of revolutionary.

So maybe you're thinking, OK, but I run a WoD MUSH, so this doesn't apply to my game or my game's culture, and I have that A+ open door policy etc.

That's great but if a lifelong MUD player wanders into your game — if you're intending to leave that door open as opposed to just sticking with a group you know and are super comfortable with — then they may not be used to your vastly superior culture just yet, and an easily tracked, documented system like this may be preferable for them personally based on the other kinds of game cultures they're used to.

[Ghost]

@Pandora In my experience, asking "hey could we not" is often an opening to things that are bothersome, like guilting or negotiating or shaming.

When I say "could we not?" I'm not really saying "hey let's talk about this" but instead "I dont like this". So, I guess it would be better to just say: "I dont like where this is going and need to bow out".

One of the benefits explained in the whole X-Card thing is that it's a contract to not require explanation as to why the card was pressed. It's a contract that says "all you have to do is press the XCard and I'll just flow with it in a different directions, no questions asked."

Because who wants to explain to strangers personal past traumatic experiences or personal fears?

IMO the best part about the XCard is that if you contract to not pestering or requiring explanation going in, then everyone involved may be more likely to go "alright, cool, moving to something else" rather than taking it to an OOC pressure level.

[Kanye Qwest]

Ok, yeah, I can see that - how having something in place that means you don't have to talk about the situation, or justify yourself, would make it easier to use.

[Sunny]

The reason I like this, and the X card, is for one of the reasons etiquette is a thing.

When you are having a triggered episode for some kinds of panic disorders, your brain stops working. Processing moves from logic to instinct. Only the techniques that are habit can be accessed when you are in this place. Executive function is significantly diminished. This is to put all of your available resources into paying attention to your surroundings and finding the way to escape.

So, most of the time on a mush, episodes aren't ever going to be full blown like that. However, in crisis mode - which is where we go when we are uncomfortable like this - it is milder version of the same thing. Brain doesn't work. Can't work.

If you have an exact script in front of you that is memorized/written down/requires no executive thought, it can be done. Crisis passes. Everyone calms down.

Having to find words to explain myself in crisis is HARD.

[Ganymede]

@Kestrel said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

If you're exclusively active in the kinds of WoD games that get circulated and advertised on MSB, maybe you can't fathom why it can kind of seem like a big deal to reach out to someone, or to staff, and let them know there's a problem.

I think this is an unfair generalization. I know plenty of the people that have chimed in here have played on WoD games, have a lot of friends to play with, and yet still suffer from the same anxiety you do. Let's just presume that this is a problem across all genres, regardless; I know I am, even if I don't suffer from the problem because I am actually a complicated algorithm invented by a feline practitioner of law.

---

@Ghost said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

Because who wants to explain to strangers personal past traumatic experiences or personal fears?

This is kind of why I like +warn.

I mean, yes, the point of the command is to tell people "please stop or I will kill you". Some people may be anxious to say this to another player. But if I recall correctly, the point of Pandora's discussion is to conceive of a command that will discourage another player from ICly engaging in conduct which would make another player uncomfortable. What better way to discourage this than by saying "keep this up and you'll be a grease spot"?

Creeps and predators online are generally cowards (there are a few exceptions).

[Kestrel]

The last time I told someone on a MUSH that they were making me uncomfortable and that I wanted space, they took offence to it, started passive-aggressively complaining about me on the MSB gripes thread, and persistently continued sending me pages indicating that we needed to talk about it sooner or later, despite me repeatedly (exhaustingly) trying to outline for them the fact that I have a mental health condition they were exacerbating and that I simply didn't want to continue.

I didn't actually say anything about how much I hated this to anyone but them (and my bestie, @dev, who was driven away by the same fuckstick) until maybe a year later, at which point that game's staffer reached out to me to mention they had an inkling about who I was referring to (as like here, I didn't mention them by name) and reassured me they would've done something had I come forward. Which is very comforting to know; I don't blame that staff-member at all for what happened here.

At the time though, me & @dev were just these two randos who'd wandered into what seemed like a really tight-knit community, and on +pub all we ever saw was that fuckstick brown-nosing staff, going on about how they'd known them for years and would follow them to the grave and beyond; there was this player we really liked, who was in an RL relationship with the fuckstick; I started avoiding her even though she seemed really cool because I imagined he might be bitching to her about me and I didn't want to go there.

Anything that could've simplified this would've been great. In fact I'd take it a step further and suggest that it could be beneficial for OOC communication channels, not just scenes. If a pages convo gets flagged red it needs to stop. If issues persist and staff can see there've been a lot of red/yellow flags etc., they know there's something worth investigating here.

It could even be useful on public channels, like say someone makes a seemingly innocent antisemitic/sex joke about me, I might throw out a "yellow" to let people know that hey, while I totally get you're just joshing around and being cute, I'm actually not cool with this and would like it to stop.

Can't count the number of times I could've used that on Discord and the like where I had to grit my teeth and let someone know in a public server that unless I know them IRL and they buy me beer and we're in private and maybe actually dating, oral sex jokes directed at me are not acceptable banter.

@Ganymede that's totally fair, I'm just drawing conjecture here in trying to understand where people are coming from. MSB is such a progressive community compared to a lot of others I know, so I'm just scratching my head a bit as to why this idea is rubbing so many people the wrong way. I wouldn't expect it here.

Also just to break the ice here this is for you.

[Pandora]

@Ganymede Of course it bears keeping in mind that oftentimes it'll be someone in no position to be making threats that's hitting the abort mission button.

[mietze]

I think my issue with warn (though I love that too) is that it implies that it's okay to continue on in the play as long as you accept there might be consequences. What happens when the +warn is issued by a PC that is a vastly different social or stat power level and both know it? (Or think they know it?)

I think warn works best for IC consequence potential, but redcarding is less about that and more about ooc comfort about graphic content or subject matter.

[surreality]

I miss warn existing for 'hey, what you're doing is going to result in negative consequences if you keep it up' purposes.

It is a good way of handling the 'I don't want to go to jail' player, because they are getting a concrete heads-up, and if they choose to continue? Sorry, bucko, jail it is.

I think it was Arx (I don't play there so someone else will have to confirm) that had something like an +ineedanadult command or such? Maybe not that exact wording, but even something like the graphic command described above would be helpful for 'we're getting a little too vivid with the adjectives up in here' and so on.

I wouldn't count on +warn to ever communicate 'I'm uncomfortable'. I do think +warn is great for 'you're heading into dangerous territory and should be aware there are consequences coming if you continue', and I miss it being there for that reason. It's more for 'you're heading into territory with consequences that could make YOU uncomfortable', not 'you're heading into territory that makes ME uncomfortable'.

[Ganymede]

@Pandora said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

Of course it bears keeping in mind that oftentimes it'll be someone in no position to be making threats that's hitting the abort mission button.

Granted.

If I recall, the command also triggered a message on a channel for staff indicating when the command was used. And I think the command also stated that such a notice was sent to staff. There was also a command that would initiate a timestop and notify staff. If you wanted to continue, you had to go into the timestop and wait for staff. The combination of the two was an effective deterrent, I think, for people that wanted to prey on anyone ICly.

I mean, it's been a long time since that game. We're in a culture that shies away from PK as a method of resolving IC conflict, which is fine. And I may have been sheltered from a lot of the predatory behavior because I have the online presence of being smashed in the dick with a hammer.

I'm just tossing out another suggestion based on observations.

[bored]

Yeah, +warn (along with +timestop, +ftb, etc) all existed for a long time on WoD games and probably elsewhere. So if anything it's not that we've never tried something like what's being proposed here. There were versions of +ftb that were definitely meant to a hard stop & contact staff for whatever details, and not a licence to pose a bunch of excessive extra stuff as has been described. Games have tried different versions of it throughout, yet in the end seemingly gave up on the idea and moved away from it. If I had to guess why, it's because those commands were often pretty underutilized.

Which leads me to the thought that it's not merely a matter of having the commands or not. We've had them, they're not magic bullets. It's really about building an overall structure of all the involved parts: staff policy (and follow-through), overall player culture, individual willingness to act, and the appropriate OOC tools. This kind of thing is trivial to code (its what, basically just an emit and maybe a staff channel echo?), but it's hard to implement culturally and see adopted.

[Kestrel]

@bored said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

Which leads me to the thought that it's not merely a matter of having the commands or not. We've had them, they're not magic bullets. It's really about building an overall structure of all the involved parts: staff policy (and follow-through), overall player culture, individual willingness to act, and the appropriate OOC tools. This kind of thing is trivial to code (its what, basically just an emit and maybe a staff channel echo?), but it's hard to implement culturally and see adopted.

Well, the more the merrier I say. Is there such a thing as putting too much effort into making your community comfortable?

I also don't know about anyone but even in less stressful contexts, i.e., where there's clear and enthusiastic consent present, I don't know that I've ever been upset about knowing just how much my partner (or RP partner) cares that I'm enjoying myself.

A quick flash of green on both sides also has the benefit of being a feelgood, warm & fuzzy trust-building tool.

[bored]

@Kestrel Oh for sure, nothing wrong with trying them out (again, it's trivial on a code-effort side). I just think there's maybe a weird tendency to lean on this like 'oh if only we'd do this, it would make such a difference,' and I feel its worth highlighting that we have done it and it wasn't particularly any sort of panacea.

Which is why I emphasize its more about the collective approach. Its not how many pieces you have, its how you put them together into a cohesive set of game policy & culture.

[surreality]

@bored said in Personal Agency for Personal Boundaries:

This kind of thing is trivial to code (its what, basically just an emit and maybe a staff channel echo?), but it's hard to implement culturally and see adopted.

On the upside, I think we're seeing more follow-through and willingness to be involved and take action on the staff side, broadly, than has been present in the past. The tools won't work without it.

I think a lot of the failure in the past has been due to staff reticence to take action. Lately, we see the 'go directly to staff' suggestion on account of this general sea change, but it has its own complications.

I'm definitely more optimistic re: the potential positive impact of tools these days than I would have been a decade ago, when I last saw the ones mentioned in common usage.

[bored]

@surreality Yeah, which demonstrates the necessary policy/cultural change. I also think @faraday really deserves some credit here (and its unfortunate she was kind of jumped on) because developing vastly more technically complicated code to facilitate the reporting process on Ares and thus make complaints more actionable is an important step there and one that reflects the technological improvements we need to keep up with. 100% client-side logging isn't reliable, and so it's not reliably actionable, and that helps undermine the entire process.

Basically, trivial code or trivial player effort will be sufficient in trivial cases (ooc please stop -> ooc ok!, or +ftb -> silence). Its the non-trivial cases that are largely the issue, not only when they happen, but because of the specter they cast over other interactions. And it's here that it's important to know not just that you have whatever initial command, but also an entire route you can follow-up through with a reasonable expectation of support and action.

[Pandora]

I sincerely apologize if at any point it seemed as if I jumped on @faraday as that was never my intention, I certainly didn't post anything to undermine coded efforts at more reliable logging on the types of games many of you play.

That said, downplaying the experiences of people who've found themselves in these situations as trivial is unfortunate, especially when the conversation has largely been about using new/necro'd code to facilitate a structured, easy to navigate system currently lacking in many instances. Game culture in the past, as @surreality mentioned, has never been as woke as it is now, and options back then unsupported by today's awareness, accountability, and follow-through from staff are all possible options that I'd love to see implemented and experimented with.