Posts made by mietze

@Auspice So you did not hire people who did not want to perform the tasks required for the role that you wanted filled. By definition that is not hiring the most reluctant or people who do not want the job--you are hiring only people who wish to fulfill the expectations of that job.

That is a very far cry from having a prime qualifier for the role of staff be a reluctance to doing the work.

I think the problem comes when people do NOT have specifics as to what they are hiring for and then dont ger what they want because they havent bothered to tell anyone or expect people to know due to common sense. I have seen head wiz make that mistake a lot, and invariable blame the people for not being good staffers when in fact they didn't communicate they expectations and avoided until they could not do so anymore firing anyone who could not meet expectations once explained.

I really really really really really prefer people who run games to actually WANT to run games.

Why would I want someone who doesnt want the job to take that role? Why would reluctance to do the job qualify someone to take on that role?

Why should someone excited and enthusiastic about running or helping to run a game be looked at with suspicion? In my experience the worst people to do any job are the ones that feel like they are a martyr or that "nobody else could do it."

Nobody is going to love all aspects of any job all of the time most likely. It's really dismaying to me when people devalue both skill and willingness to undertake something because they think only people who do not want to can do it well. That's been many the downfall of a volunteer organization or team almost certainly mushes, imo.

Honestly there is also a degree of personal responsibly involved on the part of people who do not feel safe or comfortable in a sphere/game where they know that a specific individual is also active. the decision to leave or walk away is purely their own. If that person is not banned then you do not get to dictate that your experience will not involve them. If you leave that is your choice, not that they "drove you off." It sucks to be in the situation where you have to make that decision. It is stressful and doesnt feel great. You may or may not ask for accommodation if staff allows that sort of thing. But as much as it sucks (and I totally 100 percent understand having to weigh those decisions, having BTDT, it's an ouch) you have to own it on your end as well.

.@Arkandel said in Punishments in MU*:

Sometimes not just the best but the only deterrent is publicly pointing a finger at someone and telling them they are assholes.

I'm not really sure that it is ever a deterrent. In my experience people always think that they were justified/just joking around/it was someone else's fault/they couldn't help themselves so should get a pass/they were under the influence, ect. Usually people do not do things they do not feel like they are not entitled to do. I think game discipline and policies should be about how to maintain the environment wanted rather than prevention.

In the case of game bans I'm not really sure that's very effective community shaming, since there are lots of people who have been asked to leave a game and suffer no ill effect in the wider community. Half the time someone is tossed off a game (esp when they are "popular" or "active") the first wider community response is to denigrate the staff for being so mean.

I wish a game ban was more taken as a "this person was not a good fit for the game or behaved at that time in a way that the staff did not feel like/feel like they were equipped for" rather than OMFG THIS PERSON IS A HORRIBAD HORRIBLE BURRRRRNNNN THEMMMMMM.

@Tinuviel honestly when I hear "ban" I do not think of anything other than removal from the game. I was unaware that many people would say "ban" when what they meant was /any/ punishment in game even if it did not remove that player from the game.

I only play on one game, but it seems like there are very few bans for the size of the population and a great deal of time spent correcting things alternatively. This is true in any game I've ever staffed really.

I wonder if the perception of "staff only ban or do nothing" is not more because of the perennial "if I dont see it it doesnt exist" than a reality of "either people just ban people or do nothing." Bans are almost always announced. The other stuff rarely is. Which does tie back to a certain part of privacy (not making every player's disciplinary strikes or problems public on game). Man, I feel like I should be proud of myself for staying OT.

I think most folks are aware. But that is just kind of how things are. Every once in awhile you will have someone who will wear out their welcome almost universally, sorta, even here--but it isnt very often and if they want to they'll be able to find a place to play at.

That's why I think concentrating on a truly big picture is futile and exhausting. As staff or as a player really the only think you are ever going to be able to control is what you personally do, so I think if privacy and use of information from non game sources is important, you need to ask staff if they do not have a policy posted or write and amend over time if needed as staff.

We can have the expectation that these things will never change on any game we play/staff, but honestly I'm not sure that is a useful or even realistic expectation.

I do not think its ban or nothing.

There's always a spectrum of player discipline. Whether that's removal of IC or OOC goodies or leadership positions, a temp ban, a verbal warning, ect. It just depends on the actual situation.

I just think that when it comes to a high level violation (like we are talking about here), I think most places that had a problem with someone who abused their access to "private" info would let them go. Possibly they would disclose why through the grapevine (including here). People who have been removed for cause in regards for using their access to game information or personal behavior violations from one game are often welcomed to another game immediately or even to the same community over time.

Doing the moulage thing again today, and I brought a buddy.

@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.

@Ghost some of it may just be cultural/familiarity, at least for older gamers who played on places where that was often used to humiliate/cheat? I think most perceived violating behavior that I have heard about in the last say 6 or 7 years or so has largely revolved around multi-platform spying/whisper campaigns, ect. Not so much dark staffers in rooms or pulling histories.

I would be really curious to see what people who have only been doing this for the last 3 or 4 years think of when it comes to privacy on a game. My guess is that it will be all over the map but more about harassment than cheating or trying to catch people breaking "rules". These days I think it is more expected than not that every scene will be logged by at least one participant--i do not remember that expectation (and in fact people would freak out at the thought) of someone logging all interactions each time (which catches all private/ooc communication too).

It is a pretty interesting thought.

Part of that discussion by necessity should include not only ideals but common (and uncommon) things that are likely to happen to fall short.

And IMO permission for people to also have varying degrees of risk adversity be able to discuss their concerns without it turning into either "whaddya expect, it's the wild west and anything goes" or "if you participate in any game at all that isn't secured and there's the possibility of people chatting about other than game stuff then you are stupid." There's a huge middle ground there, and I personally think there is a lot of room for different standards on different games too. Both in what they promise "wont happen" and in how they respond when things do happen.

I think this conversation is a valuable one to have, even on a cyclical basis, much like the conversations we continually have with our teens about online safety (now mine are old enough and tech savvy enough that I think I personally get more information than any I dispense). It is easy to forget/get sloppy about. And risk adversity goes up and down, and can be circumstantial. Even if the problem is not "solved." It is stil important imo to think about and personally re/evaluate from time to time whether you're a player or admin.

There is only so much you can do about privacy/safety if you want to actually get out and do and participate in things.

Being aware of that is great. Imply that people who do not have everything in lockdown and most secure mode are stupid is... I guess kind of what a recluse would say as an excuse as to why they do not participate in anything beyond their own home?

I do think it's good that people understand that it is possible for things to be logged/shared even remotely if that is what the game runner chooses to do now or in the future. No matter what they say in the shit you do not read before typing I Agree.

Playing on a game does involve some risk. Including, yes, that you may encounter people who are gross enough to try and extrapolate your location or put together pieces of various conversations in order to engage in harassment of you by calling CPS, tracking down and harassing spouses, looking up cell phone numbers for further off game harassment/pressure (I have had this happen to close online and RL friends over the years!). Will it happen to everyone, no. Will everyone see this happen, no. Is it enough for some people to never play a mush? Yes, and I respect that.

I also think that sometimes people forget how small the degrees of separation in who you know in the mush community are. So even if you only share personal info with a handful of people in your entire mushing experience chances are a much wider circle of people than you expect knows things like your name, where you live, your family structure, ect. Even people you loathe and wouldnt tell a thing.

But I personally think that is a risk in any social activity. My RL stalker located me on a professional license registry that I am required by law to be on as long as I was licensed by the state and used me to track down and show up at my business. He used the transparency and public disclosure requirements of my state to find out about my volunteer service in a local political party (as an elected official and board member of the party) and then showed up at a meeting. I guess we should say if you do not want a stalker to show up to get he face to face interaction they want from you, you shouldn't have decided to be a professional with a license, nor should you serve in any kind of publicly disclosed organization (like a non profit board either--i found out later he showed up at a PTA event that I was chairing the committee of too). I did quit 2 of the 3 things because it was terrifying to have that happen. And I'm sure there are some people who think that because I put myself out there in that way that of course I cant complain about that happening as it's all my fault for not locking down.

I just do not think that's a reasonable viewpoint for how most people live their lives.

I view mushing as I do any other social hobby. There is a risk that you are going to meet some not very nice people. And even some deeply disturbed or malicious ones. You have to decide your own boundaries, and you also have to understand how they can be breached beyond your control (like a mutual friend chatting about you, or you venting to someone about a third party not realizing that person is that third party's long term friend, ect) as far as things "getting out."

Most of the privacy breaches I've seen that cause significant damage are less about staff secretly recording or wanking off by being a peeping tom (super gross) and enjoying knowing that would freak people out if they knew/when they disclosed it, but people using information (true or false in malicious ways). I do not think a privacy policy will prevent that for the people who like doing that. Maybe it can set some behavioral best practices for everyone else though.

Mostly, I deal with this stuff by trying to only play on games where I feel that I can trust staff enough that I can talk to them about behavior that makes me uncomfortable or worried, and that whether or not I agree with or see the response I can trust that it will be noted in case there are other incidents.

I would rather see a "behavior breach response" policy than a list of promises that arent always in the control of the person making them.

I have no clue how old y'all are, but um. I never had acne as a teen or even while pregnant/postpartum but starting in my late thirties I started to have minor blemishes out of nowhere and started to react to cosmetics very differently). It lasted for a few years and then finally disappeared for other kind of even more annoying things. (Not hot flashes yet at least). I still break out more than I did as a teen but luckily not quite as often as I did!

Yes, Magee deleted a lot of their posts before they requested to be banned. Banning does not automatically delete posts. There is one poster whose posts we do sometimes delete after they are banned again, due to their content.

@Pandora said in The ethics of IC romance, TS, etc:

You don't need the moral high ground to be pissed off. We really need to stop emotion-regulating people and telling them when it is/isn't okay to feel a feeling. There is a difference between having a feeling & treating people badly.

• Being pissed off - Valid.
• Attempting to discuss why you're pissed off and negotiating some terms that all parties involved can deal with - Valid.
• OOCly talking shit about the player of your PC spouse and forming an OOC lynch mob against Theno - Invalid.

Run your rough draft of the attempt at communication by a non-MU friend. They'll have no dog in the race and can help you with your tone if that's something important to you; it's easy to come off as aggressive or worse when you're understandably upset.

I really cannot agree with this enough. People feel upset sometimes especially after a disappointment. Ironically I have observed that some of the people who scream the loudest about "OMG its just a game keep your ooc reaction out if it you loser!" tend to be the ones that go thermonuclear if the shoe is on the other foot. People have plans, they get attached to those plans, but when they also depend on other people going along with things or staying out of the way at least, they sometimes get derailed/blown up/sent down another track.

I wish we did better at allowing people those emotions without shaming it, while being less tolerant of explosive /behavior/ towards other players.

Some people though will interpret any discomfort they feel as an attack (I think that is why often times folks who like to wag a finger at people feeling upset over something IC can be so reactive themselves--they do not want to deal with any expression of disappointment y anyone else and that is why they want to claim such wide boundaries for themselves.) And as you say there are definitely people who weaponize being a sad moppet.

I think in interacting with people one has to be tolerant of a discomfort with how they feel that might be different from desired/expected. I do think that many people think about this in the hobby, but sometimes it's pretty difficult to negotiate.

Magee101 requested their account be banned or deleted. That is why they are now banned, because we do not normally delete accounts or posts.

At the time it was thought that making a big deal about this after they had already posted they were leaving (the request was made after they posted that) would not be productive.

But as there seems to be some misinterpretation as to why that ban happened, clarity is given now.

Maybe that would have happened anyway once the admin had fully waded through everything. But if you send a PM requesting to be banned and there is not really a reason to not grant that request, then that is what will happen.

Of course, the week that the head honcho of my husband's company (he telecommutes to the UK, we live in the US) decides to come to the US for the first time in...a really long time, so my hubby needs to actually meet up with this guy in order for some face to face stuff....my youngest comes down with hand, foot, and mouth disease and is now excluded from school for the rest of the week. Thank goodness my job has pretty generous sick leave benefits and nobody is already out for vacation (we are a semi-skeleton crew). Now hopefully hubby won't contaminate his boss in time for his trip back to the UK...:P