GMs and Players

[Tinuviel]

The older I get, the more I realise what I view as reasonable and what others view as reasonable are often not the same. Someone's going to be annoyed by what I think, say, or do regardless.

[mietze]

@derp All of the times discord based discussions have been referenced, that I can remember, there has always been an on game component. Along with a lot of shouting down and distraction based on the fact that there was any off game connection at all.

I also think it is apt and also telling that in the mcdonald's example, the person with the history of being abused is "yelling" and acting crazy (instead of just turning around and leaving, which is the much more likely response on a game) while the person who is stated to be the abuser is "chill". How many times do we see that play out on games, where the "chill" dude just is so awesome, these crazy jealous chicks are always trying to get him in trouble. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but there's a cultural thing here that I think makes it super difficult for people to report abusive behavior (on or off site) that we all kind of struggle with.

So I think how these things are handled and talked about really matters a lot. If there is shaming about off game contact that can set up a situation where it makes it hard for people to report in game stuff. Sometimes unintentionally that may be the message that people get with how things are framed.

[krmbm]

@devrex said in GMs and Players:

Why we expect more out of MU* runners than we expect off of any other site or service or app you log into is way beyond me.

Because it's a much more intimate setting with personal access to the administrator.

I don't know about you guys, but I've never talked to the people who own Discord (however that's managed). I've definitely never paged Zuckerberg and asked him if he could give me any pointers for getting involved in the plot.

[bear_necessities]

You don't have to "police" Discord to respond to something to players on your game. Much like @mietze said, if it's happening on Discord? It's happening all over your game, or they just took it to Discord to feel 'protected' from staff or whatever.

If anyone came to me and said their crazy ex who beat them was on the game and they needed help, I wouldn't think twice to nuke the toon. Just like if I was a manager at McDonald's and someone came up to me and asked me for help because their crazy ex who beat them is here, I would pick up the phone and call the police and put the woman somewhere where she can feel safe. It's like, the very basic of what a decent human being would do even if it's not expressly in your job title or whatever.

[Derp]

@krmbm said in GMs and Players:

I've definitely never paged Zuckerberg and asked him if he could give me any pointers for getting involved in the plot.

Because that's not what Zuck is there for.

And that's kind of our point.

You don't page Zuck about how to get involved in MU plot and you don't page a MU admin about your off-game interpersonal issues with another player unless they become an issue of game rules.

@reimesu has already seen us take action against players. we're not averse to it. But she brought us evidence and laid out a case and we said 'ok, here is what we are going to do', and laid out a path to be followed. The same as we would do for anyone else.

@mietze said in GMs and Players:

I also think it is apt and also telling that in the mcdonald's example, the person with the history of being abused is "yelling" and acting crazy (instead of just turning around and leaving, which is the much more likely response on a game) while the person who is stated to be the abuser is "chill". How many times do we see that play out on games, where the "chill" dude just is so awesome, these crazy jealous chicks are always trying to get him in trouble.

Sunny was free to turn around and walk out of the game if her ex husband showed up. I'm not going to stop her.

That wasn't the example she used. And I altered her example to make it a restaurant instead of a MU.

And in that example, she wasn't reporting abusive behavior that occurred on the game, which is a very different beast. Which is the point we're trying to make. How she's perceived isn't actually all that relevant, because I'm not interested in how she and other dude feel about each other or what their interpersonal dynamics are. I'm interested to know what happened, substantively, that is against our rules, which our in-game tools report quite easily.

I don't have to like you to take action against someone being a douchebag.

@bear_necessities said in GMs and Players:

would pick up the phone and call the police and put the woman somewhere where she can feel safe. It's like, the very basic of what a decent human being would do even if it's not expressly in your job title or whatever.

Yeah, you would call the police because the police are there to deal with shit like that. Which is also kind of the point.

[krmbm]

@derp said in GMs and Players:

Because that's not what Zuck is there for.

I just think equating "running a MUSH" to "running Facebook" is a reach. They're both online communities; that's about where the similarities end.

The reason you're not asking for help from the "game owner of Discord" is because you don't have access to that person because they are running a business that caters to a massive audience.

You are running a MUSH with 12 people on it.

You need to treat it that way.

[bear_necessities]

@derp said in GMs and Players:

Yeah, you would call the police because the police are there to deal with shit like that. Which is also kind of the point.

I actually think you're purposefully missing all the points here which makes this not a very constructive thread.

[Derp]

@krmbm said in GMs and Players:

You are running a MUSH with 12 people on it.
You need to treat it that way.

I'm running a website where grown-ass adults play a game after agreeing to abide by a certain set of rules.

Exactly how do you think I should be treating it?

I'm not their therapist, parent, or legal guardian. I'm not their attorney or their spouse.

I'm the gamerunner. The website admin. And the DM of the game.

Anything else you all want to take on above and beyond that is just that -- above and beyond. But let's be real about the baseline if we're going to talk about setting reasonable boundaries, because that, to me, is not being reasonable.

@bear_necessities said in GMs and Players:

I actually think you're purposefully missing all the points here which makes this not a very constructive thread.

I mean, I could say the same for you. You would go above and beyond the job description. Cool.

I'm going to stick to the job description and give you the tools to help yourself. You the battered spouse or whatever are perfectly capable of standing in the public restaurant and calling the police and waiting until they arrive to deal with the problem. You don't need anyone else to do that for you, and it's not reasonable to put the burden of your interpersonal issues on a complete stranger and expect that they're going to take up arms in your favor.

[reimesu]

Having seen @Devrex and @Derp in action, what I'll say here is this: if @Sunny came to them and said "My abusive ex-husband is on the game," well, no action was actually requested there. Ok, yeah. He's a piece of shit, but that's just information being offered.

If Sunny came to them and said, "My abusive ex-husband is on the game, these are the behaviors he's already exhibiting, I'm asking for a DNC, and making sure you guys know it," that's different. Because it gives them something to work with. And they'll take action.

I mean, @mietze is right: if someone's abusive on Discord, they'll be abusive on the game, too. But you can block someone on Discord. And then they'll HAVE to be abusive on the game, there's no other outlet and then they get their shitty asses booted but good.

But being proactive about booting someone for being a reported piece of shit can backfire hugely, if you find out the person doing the reporting is actually a manipulative jerk. I've seen both scenarios, where the person reporting is the jerk and the person being reported is the jerk. (I've lived through too many games with VASpider on.) Having a plan to offer and something to back your words up is not an unreasonable wish.

(Editing to add, no, @Sunny, I promise, I'm not accusing you of anything. It was an example, that's all.)

[krmbm]

@derp said in GMs and Players:

Exactly how do you think I should be treating it?

Like you are running a MUSH with 12 people on it.

If that, to you, means a "bring your big boy britches" approach to player issues, right on.

To me, it means that these people are very likely acquaintances if not friends (many of whom I've know for years now), and I will treat them as such.

I think the "abusive ex-husband" scenario is ridiculous and over-the-top, but I also learned some hard lessons staffing GH and made some big mistakes. Not treating players like they are my friends that I enjoy and need to stand up for is one of them.

I hope you don't wind up with the same hindsight one day.

[3543thrh67]

@Derp I think what they are saying is that while it shouldn't be the go to thing off the game stuff shouldn't be completely thrown away and 'non-canon' or 'not a reliable source'.

Someone being a dickface to someone on Discord could very well be doing the same on game. To me, if the discussion shown on Discord lines up with complaints on game, it should be seriously considered. Especially if it shows that it is related to stuff going on in game.

As for RP and such 'off game', I'll entirely consider it canon. I mean if they blow up a big important business off game without consulting staff or players that are involved with big important business, I'm not likely to call it canon because that basically kills off a bunch of peoples fun rather than add to it. You just blow the big important business up without involving the players and staff you could be killing planned story lines or forcing people to deal with something they are not OOC comfortable with. But if someone throws a ball, does their best to let people know it is on Discord because they can't be on the game for whatever reason, I'll totally support it as 'canon'. For me it comes down to 'does it ruin anyone's fun OOC/Storylines?' 'No? Why not let it be in canon?'

People are still RPing stuff involving my game and engaging in the theme. They are showing they /like/ the theme enough to extend their RP to 'off game' stuff. It shows they feel invested enough that they will continue/do stuff off game. Rather than view off game RP and the likes as 'non-canon', view it as someone showing the love they have for the effort you put into your theme and setting and support them for it.

My experience, so far, on Atharia from my players has been good when I engage and listen to the stories they want to tell and stuff they want clarified, they start to feel more invested and part of the game rather than just playing in the world. Yeah, I listen to what they have to say and make changes accordingly. It might not always be exactly what they wanted but it helps their head canon about theme or helps them understand something better.

So, I'm on board with doing stuff to help your players feel invested. Be it taking in account dickish behavior off game, them doing RP in other avenues besides the game (whatever it might be) or just engaging with them about your game information.

[Devrex]

@krmbm And I don't know most of 'em from Adam. See @reimesu 's example for what I'm worried about when I say:

Show me evidence, of a thing that happened, in a place that I control, and I will move hell and high water to keep you safe in that place. Because it's there. It's in black and white. There's the violation, there's the trust they broke, there it is.

But there is that other kind of predator out there, the one that whips people up with lies and ruins reputations because they enjoy using that tool to hurt people.

And the knee-jerk reaction of "Oh my god! You said they harmed you? I will nuke them immediately!" Caters to that sort.

@mietze I want to be clear that I will never shame anyone for giving out their info off game. I've given out my info off game, I've been harmed for it (and I've joyfully made new friends from it). I will however gently remind people that I can protect them to the best of my ability while they are in my virtual "house", but once they are in someone else's virtual "house" I lose my ability to do so. And in your example, they are doing stuff on game already and that's...stuff I will respond to. That's stuff you'll have a log for. A page log, a mail log, a channel log, a log log, you'll have it, and I can go "Wow, yeah, this is Not Okay, we will respond to this and thank you for bringing it to our attention."

But evidence is the standard I've chosen. Evidence, and acting within the scope of my power to act. I personally won't budge from it. Anyone can DNC anyone at any time for any reason, but if they want me to start getting happy with the ban hammer, I'm going to need something concrete to work with.

[krmbm]

@devrex said in GMs and Players:

And I don't know most of 'em from Adam.

And don't want to or...?

This isn't a dig at the way you're handling it. I just want to know: Do you need/want to keep them at arm's reach for some reason?

Where does this "approach it like a business" mentality come from? Are you protecting yourself or do you think this is really the best approach for your players?

You are one staffer. You have twelve players. Why don't you know them from Adam?

[reimesu]

@krmbm You're putting words in someone's mouth, when the original point is "people can misrepresent themselves or others." You're really reaching.

[Devrex]

@krmbm I don't know what you're getting 12 from, if you're looking specifically at my game I have about 20 right now, and the answer is, "Some I'm happy to get to know and some I prefer to keep at arm's length while serving them equally according to my rules."

It's not a business. My vibe, my approach to running a game, is more...block party. Welcome to my living room. There's the cheetos. There's the Mountain Dew. There's the pizza. Let's play some roleplaying games. And if you act up and I see it I'mma run you outta here with the figurative skinny part of a fishin' rod.

But I'm not necessarily going to extend the same level of trust to every guest at the block party. And even the ones I'd trust with my life? I'd ask for evidence. They also know this about me and respect it. They respect this hard boundary.

Once upon a time I was a very knee-jerk staffer. I pretty much responded, out of emotion, to the first person to come and spin me a story or a line. I'd empathize, I'd think that was so terrible, I'd get manipulated, and my decisions weren't fair or right. And people knew they could play me like a fiddle if they just sounded as though they were in enough pain.

I now have a better MUSH tool (Ares) and a more objective standard and a couple decades of experience behind me and have trained myself to handle things in a different way, and I think the result is I am more fair to all players. All the guests in my living room. And hopefully they are happily eating cheeseballs and pretending to wave swords around or whatever.

I'm a storyteller, that's my passion, that's what I'm good at, that's what I do this for. And I know my limits.

[krmbm]

@reimesu said in GMs and Players:

@krmbm You're putting words in someone's mouth, when the original point is "people can misrepresent themselves or others." You're really reaching.

I am? Sorry, I was just asking questions.

@devrex said in GMs and Players:

I don't know what you're getting 12 from

I was using "12" as "misc number that is not the MASSIVE NUMBER THAT BIG BUSINESSES HAVE."

Anyway. Asked and answered. We have entirely different philosophies is all. I was genuinely curious, and it seems like this has become more defensive than constructive.

[reimesu]

@krmbm It was the phrasing, it made a lot of assumptions that seem to have come out of nowhere.

However, I will say this: I'd never dream of going to ANY staffer without some form of evidence in hand, not if I expected action. Because I'd want there to be concrete evidence from my accuser if staff came after ME.

[Tinuviel]

@icanbeyourmuse said in GMs and Players:

I'll totally support it as 'canon'

I definitely misspoke when I made my canon comments, so allow me to correct myself: You can have whatever story you want among players - within reason as we've already agreed. I'm just not going to support it, encourage it, or reward it if you take it to discord or elsewhere. ETA: Because I don't want to encourage it be seen to officially approve of it.

@krmbm said in GMs and Players:

Do you need/want to keep them at arm's reach for some reason?

Yes. When you have to enforce rules, you're not their friend. You need to keep that boundary. Secondly, they're people on the internet, not my friends. You're all not my friends, you're people on the internet. We've spent hundreds of hours together, but I don't know any of you.

[Sunny]

I'm just amazed at how often I'm being @ at and how far out of context my question is being taken. It was a question. It was answered. I said 'good to know'. I'm going to go back and delete my post now, and I'd appreciate not being used in this fashion any further.

I am frankly flabbergasted at how far folks are reading into what I said and how much people can apparently tell about me, what happened, and what I might do by said question being asked. Wow.

[Derp]

@sunny

I know that we're in Mildly Constructive or whatever, but it was pretty plainly a passive-aggresive move to try and undermine the original point, and I'm definitely not alone in that reading.

You weren't used. You did a thing and got called out. Deal.