The Pack Discussion

[Macha]

Well, since @Cobalt decided to go to that other Forum, where she is fully aware I do not go, and would not make an account at, to display half-logs and even more half-truths, here we go.

1. I had gone to Cobalt, about someone I had done a fair amount of RP with, that kept saying they didn't want to share the logs. I could see it on some of them, the more emotional stuff, or revealing weaknesses. I asked her if it seemed Sus or Red Flagg-y, and she said it did. I said I was trying to work it out with the player, and not get staff involved. I should have told her straight up, the player was Isaac, and had it 'on file', because I am totally certain the log he sent her came after that interaction I had with her.

2. While I have have not indulged in going over to BMD to read the endless slagging I've been told by a good dozen or so is going on, I have been shown what she posed as her proof my character 'attempted SA' and then gaslit another character, was not the whole log, nor did she share, or claim to have seen any other context.

Now, when I told someone that I was frustrated that Isaac's player was resistant to sharing (And Isaac's weird insistence they were not in a relationship, but more than friends, etc) , they suggested I download all the unshared scenes before I went to him and tried to explain why it matters to me, and before I went to Cobalt. So I have 9 logs, since the 10th one was shared just before I was banned.

The log in which Cobalt says my character attempted SA on a character rolling on Molly (and possibly mixing it with something else is hinted at - Do not read if you are uncomfortable with RP mention drug use/someone being high, or of friends cuddling/ a kiss aimed for a cheek and hitting the jawline.)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TL2I-xoQropEpSdRP4GZAFVhH2N4wl14PRNYQY9-7Gg/edit?usp=sharing

Also, it may be just me, but since they have enhanced senses, you'd think he'd know she was jerking his chain about the sex thing right away. And - honestly? If tucking drunk/high friends in, and sleeping next to them (in case they get sick, the high goes bad, etc) and even snuggling is attempted SA, I guess me and a good dozen of my friends from my partying days have a lot to answer for?

That scene started on 2/14, and ended a couple/few days later, due to RL. Their very next scene, was started on 2/18 - the night of the amateur night at the Peach. She'd mentioned it to Isaac previously in yet another unshared scene, but this scene references the one before it.
(There is again off screen drug use, mention of it, and description of a striptease. There's discussion of accidents and death, due to drugs.) This scene reveals the secret Cobalt made us put into our app for the game, and at least partly why Mackenzie was so emotional in the first scene.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CGAwTgMma2u9gixcEx0gHJAUiBFZqJn44dSvznAv640/edit?usp=sharing

Add in the fact Cobalt waited days to Ban me and in light of knowing I was having issues with someone I'd played with a good deal, she never thought to take a second and think about that, it seems, or speak to me at all.

Could Isaac's player have altered the logs he gave her, if more than one? Certainly. But the copy paste I was shown of the log chunk she shared was similar if not the same as the one I'm sharing, so.. you can judge?

[Devrex]

@Macha Read the first one, skimmed the second. In both, all I saw was two characters making questionable choices, which characters are allowed to do.

We don't expect characters to interact with story like they would react to situations RL, thus why I don't run up and down the streets with a gun rescuing various kidnap victims or whatever.

I see nothing that wouldn't be bog standard drama generation on half-a-dozen PG-14 television shows. I'm not getting SA off this. Do I think it's ethical or wise to cuddle with someone in bed IRL when one of them is drunk or high? I mean...no, even if it's a good friend who (probably) won't mind. Do I think it makes sense to tar and feather you for writing fiction about someone who did? Also no.

I am getting a lot of two characters who need rehab and some counseling. And it seemed like, based on the logs alone, both players were having a blast with this content. They are certainly two very long scenes. I'm not inclined to judge you for them.

[Macha]

@Devrex The cocaine was Mack's first use of drugs in a long time, but yes. Both characters were pretty broken, in different ways.

I felt like we were having fun, and he certainly stated so. We also talked a good deal in pages or OOC during scenes, to make sure the other person was comfortable.

It wasn't until I told the other player that I wanted to share some of their one on one scenes, that anything changed at all. He found out some people had asked me why NONE of our one on one scenes were shared, and .. he freaked out. (referring to as He, as the character was male)

[Derp]

You should change the sharing permissions so that anyone with the link can read them, rather than requesting access. Better form and all.

[Macha]

@Derp Weird, I thought I had them set public. Let me check.

ETA: For some reason, Google denied access, even to me. I'm not sure. It should be fixed. Anyone with the link should be able to be a viewer.

[Ghost]

I've read the logs in question and agree that it's characters making bad choices, but the leap from that to SA (which I think is unfairly accused) sets off some red flags when paired with the fact that the other player wanted to keep info about your scenes private.

I'm curious. Was the admin who banned @Macha and turned this into a super public SA accusation involved romantically with this Isaac character on one of their PCs? It feels like something critical is missing from the equation.

• Player doesn't want to make details of your scenes public
• Macha reaches out to admin to ask questions about player
• Suddenly, admin bans player, explodes in SA accusation publicly, decides to shut game down

I've seen similar situations before where a player wanted to RP "intimate" stuff with other female characters, but wanted to compartmentalize who knew the scenes were taking place out of fear of ramification. Eventually the person they don't want to find out about the scenes does (which could have happened when you messaged admin), and it turns into an explosion, accusations, etc. If this player told the admin it was "forced" on them to save their own skin, this whole thing starts to make more sense.

I feel like my gut telling me that "game owner" was ICly involved with this Isaac, found out by player who accidentally asked questions, Isaac gets questioned, says it was forced on him, admin explodes in SA accusation but closes the game down due to feeling betrayed...makes a little more sense than calling what happened in these logs sexual assault.

As for the accusation and what's going on at that other place? Don't sweat it @Macha . Thems just a bunch of confirmation bias sharks reveling at the scent of blood in the water so they can claim moral high-ground with eachother after bullying the shit out of someone. Apparently abusing people for a "good reason" excuses people from being abusers so long as their peers/fellow abusers give them high fives for it!

Edit: I've been informed the site was taken offline? So no logs, details, etc can be researched. Yeah. Somethin isn't adding up. This feels fishy

[Misadventure]

@Ghost said in The Pack Discussion:

As for the accusation and what's going on at that other place? Don't sweat it @Macha . Thems just a bunch of confirmation bias sharks reveling at the scent of blood in the water so they can claim moral high-ground with eachother after bullying the shit out of someone. Apparently abusing people for a "good reason" excuses people from being abusers so long as their peers/fellow abusers give them high fives for it!

Yep.

[simplications]

This looked like a good shoot to me. Both people being gross doesn't excuse either one. If it was just the manipulative, sexually-exploitative IC behavior to judge on it'd be easier to shrug at. But I took a look at "that other site" and there's a healthy discussion about the long problematic history of the author of this thread. Together these paint a more complete picture. If I needed more corroborating evidence, that the author chose to come here to plead their case rather than where there was already significant discussion by a much larger community is telling.

I've been following both this and the other forum for some time and the responses in this thread (from what seems to be the full complement of this site's active users) are the nail in the coffin I needed to remove this site from my MU*-related links. Y'all gross. Do better.

[Macha]

@simplications I don't know you, but I do know one thing - the 'long problematic history' from the other site's perspective? I wouldn't keep my mouth shut and be a good little background character ALL THE TIME, for a certain group.

Another little duo hated that my character/RP complicated their character getting what they wanted, so they went to staff about me.

In this case? I made mistakes, yes. I didn't just tell Cobalt who it was refusing to share. I let the 'no log sharing' go on way too long, before someone else pointed out it was a huge red flag.

WHY would I go over there, where there's an actual THREAD about me, with a lot of baseless BS? I don't go there, I don't have an account there. I don't even think they would allow me to have an account there, to be perfectly frank. WHY would I go to a party with people who would throw drinks at me just for showing up?

[Ghost]

@simplications said in The Pack Discussion:

and there's a healthy discussion about the long problematic history of the author of this thread.

Lol yeah I felt the list of their totally nonbiased misdeeds including "has minions" "crap talked someone" and "was a contributor in the MSB/BMD split" was both healthy and empirical.

Let's not use that term "healthy" too liberally, now, lest "Played Hogwarts Legacy on PS5" and "Prefers Thor2 to Thor3" end up on their "rap sheet" lol.

[Macha]

@Ghost Wait. I have MINIONS? And no one TOLD ME? ... what do I do with those, again?

I mean, I have people I like. People I might even call friends. Are those the minions, or do I not get it?

I reported someone for breaking a request to not message me, and I am suddenly a contributor. -snort- But if I had done that to someone over there, dear heavens!

ETA: I don't own a PS5, and No one prefers Dark World to Ragnarok. No one that isn't some emo edgelord.

[Ghost]

@Macha I just question that "crap talked people", "contributed to the MSB/BMD split", "has minions", and "has been accused of being toxic" are a qualified list of offenses on a forum full of people crap talking others with their minions, who have been accused of being toxic, who were also part of the MSB/BMD split...makes any sense at all.

That's kind of like Kool-Ade accusing Tang of being a powdered flavor-drink.

Also, I prefer Dark World to Ragnarok.

[Macha]

@Ghost Emo boy.

[Ghost]

And for what it's worth, I still wanna know if the "SA accuser" had a PC in some kind of IC relationship with this Isaac character. Not accusing anyone of anything (yet?), but I think it's important information while trying to responsibly get down to the bottom of what has happened here. Something is definitely off.

[Macha]

@Ghost I can not speak to anyone else's actions or intent. I tried to be honest with both the player of Isaac and everyone else I was playing with. I went to Cobalt when I was concerned something may become an issue, but.. here we are.

Also, if it is being insinuated he was harem building (and she is apparently warning people about said harem builder, from what I've received second hand), why wasn't he banned, when someone had posted logs telling one girl he wasn't interested in dating and wanting to go for something with another, was suddenly banned for 'playing them both'?

[Derp]

@Ghost

Yeah, that’s kind of the vibe I’m getting too, to be honest.

I read the logs. I see nothing wrong. I see two people wanting to play an edgy romance with broken people, and two players who were clearly consenting to what was going down.

Apparently, out of the blue, Isaac feels uncomfortable — even though he continues with the RP and even suggests going further than what was previously suggested?

There’s definitely something missing here.

Pure Conjecture Follows

I will say that during my times with Cobalt, it would not at all surprise me if what went down was something closer to this:

Cobalt is interested in Isaac. Cobalt expresses that interest. Isaac reciprocates but is also doing so with various other people, which Cobalt finds out about and takes offense to. Cobalt confronts Isaac, who throws @Macha under the bus by saying how he thought it would be fine but now it’s all weird and stuff, and so Cobalt instantly goes on the offensive, declaring him an undeserved victim of harassment and removing the impediment to her amorous desires problem player. She then finds out about others, and suddenly her ‘victim of harassment’ is ‘on a ban watchlist for harem building’, because that’s the only way to save face at that point.

This dude is very clearly not a victim of anything, unless you count unusual verb tense choices. There’s definitely something more. And, as I said, the above is pure conjecture, but it tracks with historical precedent, so it would not at all surprise me.

Take it all with a huge grain of salt. I think that sufficient receipts have been provided to disprove the theory that he was the innocent victim of harassment and that Macha is some kind of monstrous boogeyman, personally, but you do you.

[Ghost]

@Derp Yeah. Just giving the whole thing a 10,000 foot view, I feel like "Why did this result in a banning and an SA accusation coming to staff?" and "Why is the owner of the game saying this incident is involved in the decision to close the game?" are strange, unanswered holes in what is clearly a caustic situation. Having not just started MUing last week, I've seen situations like this before, and in a good number of those situations there is some kind of triangle factor where one person is more invested in it than they claim, or are invested in the situation for reasons they're not making known.

Obviously, with the site closed up there's no log evidence to pore through and (shockingly) the accusation was taken to the one place where people don't need much empirical evidence to "seek rational justice and discourse" (airquotes), there's no way to really figure it out...

...which is why I think the answer to the question if Cobalt had a PC involved with this Isaac bit is pretty important.

Alas, if someone is being accused of sexual assault roleplay, popular or not, they deserve to at least be able to explain their side of things before they're marched off as horrible person #32 this week. In this case the logs don't contain SA and I think it's fair game that they shared their receipts. We are clearly not dealing with some shady person that's surprising people with rape rp.

[Cobalt]

Your view of me is really disappointing and hurtful.

[Ghost]

@Cobalt No one has accused you of anything, but situations like this have been seen before. Best to understand the whole scope.

Were one of your PCs on this game ICly involved with this Isaac bit (in some sort of intimate/romantic character arc)?

[Hella]

@Macha as someone who has been dragged through the mud by much of the same crew, I'll offer some unsolicited advice which you can choose to ignore or not, but it's meant well.

Ignore them. Let it go, as hard as that is. These people are not your people. It may feel like you need to convince them; you don't. It may also feel like the end of your world/MUing experience; it's not.

Eventually, these things have a way of coming to light. It happened for me. And when it does happen, they won't say anything about it because it's embarrassing to admit they've been the abuser/enabler all along.

And that sucks in the moment, but it gets better faster when you just move past it and let it die.