I've largely found MUSHes to be far more progressive when it comes to gender/sexuality politics than when it comes to race. I think largely because MUSH population is predominantly white, and that gender and sexuality issues are issues many have faced. Not so much race. Not really at all race. I know, being as European white-bred as I can be, I sure haven't. It's very alien to me, even though I've done all I can to try to learn and educate myself to the experiences of others.

Even then, whitey ass me still gets surprised!

A lot of players I've found -- generally those in the ok boomer-to-gen X age range -- haven't really updated themselves out of old mentalities, and will surprise me with old, non-PC terms (mulatto or Oriental I've seen many times, and was surprised by it) or ignorant prejudices that if they're not saying or doing anything hostile or negative toward a race, then they're not racist. Not all players in that age range, no. But it correlates.

There are also a lot of players I find that like to cling to the older tropes of game types, and elevate "normalized geekery" over what may be considered offensive. I've witnessed superhero games that keep FCs from the 1940s that my be built on or simply ARE racist cariactures ('The Mandarin', anyone? Or 'Gypsy Moth'). I've witnessed fantasy games that like to keep that Tolkien-esque golden age of racism where the evil overseas empires and races are usually going to be dark-skinned in some way.

For a recent example, I know just in Arx, I've felt many times uncomfortable just with the occasional jokey player culture of 'unleashing a crusade' on the made-up Arabic-themed empire. Even though I'm certain it's not theme trying to promote such a thing, at times I can witness a bit of slippery slope happening with how some of the playerbase receives it, and can be a little bit Too Real to be able to keep it safely in the realm of the fictional.

I think it takes a lot of care that people may not always employ, because they're too busy having fun geeking out to what feels normal and fun to your average middle-class white nerd, and sometimes having to see that Normal Geeky Fun in a different light -- potentially, an offensive light -- isn't everyone's cup of tea.

I am the brand new Cadenza! Also brand new entirely, and I still have no idea what I'm doing.

I find there's a transparent difference between a creepy/fixated character and a creepy/fixated player. When it's just the character, the player may choose to portray them in a specific, involved manner, but they're also picking up on other cues in a larger scene, and inclined to engage with everyone in full. They are there to RP their character, and that's it. And it's great!

Creepy players, on the other hand, don't want to do this. They don't want to engage past the agenda. They are there to get the thing, or get off on the thing, and that's it. They're participating for one reason only, and it doesn't take an especially deep read of their efforts to really sense that.

My litmus test for creepy/thirsty players is, initially, an IC one. I test to see their level of engagement with someone not the object of desire, especially with a character that they know, OOCly, they have no chance to plow. Like my alts! If I felt like someone was being cornered (and their writing was reflecting cordial disinterest, and they weren't excitedly punching out four paragraphs of reaction to that one Creepy Character within five minutes), I'd interrupt them ICly. I usually know when I've pissed off Just a Character, while the player is amused and laughing along with the swerve in their RP plan, versus pissing off a player that usually spins the narrative or editorializes in certain ways that they want me and everyone else to f off and let them bang.

I don't think I'd page anyone privately without suspecting or knowing that the Creepy Character's Player has a history, or something so egregious was done within that scene that I'd be taken out of the fiction and go: what the f?

However, I've seen that tactic been wielded, conversely, for manipulative reasons, which sucks. I've had polite, story-focused, kind friends (as well as myself!) been the targets of "concerned pages" directed at their/my IC Romance Partners (usually by the thirsty players of IC romantic rivals) trying to play protective and thoughtful 'I'm just so concerned they keep chatting with you and seem all over you', which is just a dressed-up version of unsubstantiated shit-talking. For that reason, I get leery at immediately taking something OOC, or I may question the motives of someone (especially someone I don't know well) doing that at me. Which is sad, in its way, but reflects my own reality in this hobby.

There is a definite tendency for players to dehumanize staffers -- it's easy because admin are considered the rulemakers, and therefore are in a "privileged" position to enforce who wins, who loses, who gets what, who gets kicked out. It's easy to forget there are flawed people beyond the policy enforcement, and they are friends with each other (one hopes well enough to work together), and they will have biases, judgments, preferred people to deal with, and all that. They also need to be allowed some degree of selfishness, because the minute the job no longer comes with any sort of fun, and their free time is spent mediating arguments or running stories for others... burn out is going to happen hard and fast. Things get a bit more dicey because MU*s are rarely, if ever, democracies, and players can come in with a real or supposed belief of powerlessness.

I agree that staffers usually have to work extra hard to maintain a high degree of transparency, which is one of the few ways in this medium one can demonstrate trustworthy behaviours. Not many staff teams have the time and energy to make players feel involved with game policy and theme direction, and that can sometimes make communication break down -- especially if players feel like passive players in their own free time pretendy stories.

Staff teams have the power to be very abusive. It's part and parcel of logging into a server that isn't your own. You could have someone reading every line of anything you've written or paged because they can turn on server logging without the game ever knowing. This stuff has and does happen. It is difficult to predict if it will happen to you, because the only measure of current behaviour is past behaviour.

Similarly, I see a toxic culture of entitlement come in from the player side of things. People who feel absolutely obligated to receive this, this, and that, because they put in the work to app and join. People who feel absolutely obligated to say surprising, rude things to staffers on the first interaction because they equate them with front-line service workers, and expected to deal with demands, impatience, and brusque behaviours.

I notice, similarly, when a player has had explosive fallouts with about five or six staff teams, usually over similar complaints -- they are the common denominator in all those incidents. Sometimes it's not them. Sometimes it's you.

My opinion sure isn't everyone's, but I think when I get into the point of people wanting to gender-swap a FC, I think 'why not just app an OC?' Mainly because in so many cases, gender is such a formative force that, for example, female Captain America would be worlds different from man Captain America. In that case just app an OC female Captain Switzerland or something.

Not really taking things like that into account makes me think the gender swap decision is mainly someone's fetishistic choice, or the only way they personally want to RP the FC.

I don't think I've seen gender swaps a lot, however, so much as creative interpretations of FC sexuality. Which is also always someone just wanting to bring out their particular fetish into the FC. I don't think I've ever seen that go over well. Ever.

I am one of those notorious schedulers. I haven't been able to do drop RP for years (probably not since my post-secondary years) due to other obligations, hobbies, etc. I wish at times I could do on-the-spot RP more, but I wouldn't be able to go into it with the time and attention requirements the other player deserves. So to ensure I do, I will dental surgery schedule that shit so hard.

And to aggravate my rampant scheduling, many of my RP circle are also schedulers, so I can end up in a position of being asked for RP and replying, 'Sure, I got time late next week.' Which I know is probably discouraging to someone who logs in to get RP right at that time and have to conceive of it way into the future, lol.

It may just be a dissonance that always comes between schedulers and non-schedulers. I've had some people make sounds at me to RP, I give them a date and time where I'd be free, and they back off or fail to commit. Then they make sounds again a few days later, and I'm like 'well... you didn't schedule with me, so I'm now not free that day, and not any days into next week.' I also know it, from the outside looking in, can make scheduling RPers look a bit cliqueish, since they're mainly scheduling privately rather than broadcasting sceneage requests aloud, which is another unfortunate consequence. But, at least in my case, it's not true. It's mainly me just trying to uphold appointments with people that I've scheduled with them or they with me.

What annoys me most of all are people who schedule and then flake out. I don't mean someone who pages me a 'sorry, can't that night/tonight, something came up', because things do come up, and that is legit. I mean people who forget altogether, or run off on a scheduled night to go do something else instead.

I get it, diarizing can be hard, but when one person manages to show up, it doesn't mean the concept is impossible. It just shows a lack of respect, and I usually write the player off after a couple instances of that and go on with my busy life.

Time to spam! For me, the major factors to getting RP are:

1. My schedule and time I can commit;
2. The game's specific culture in terms of scheduling and frequency of RP.

I second @juke that I personally cannot RP now the way I used to years ago. I was able to indulge this hobby as a college student with far more flexibility in terms of schedule and availability. At least for me, gone are the days I could sit and write at my own leisure.

I certainly don't speak for everyone, but my adult life is pathologically scheduled. Some people don't need to do this, and I will never fault them for it, or think them 'less busy' than I am. It's just what I have to do to have sanity. All I ask in return is that baseline of respect for how I do things, and not told 'well, you could do it a lot better', or 'I have other hobbies and commitments too, but I can still make myself available for RP for two hours, why can't you?'

I don't want to do that. This admittedly makes me a shit candidate for 'do you want to scene tonight?' requests. I do feel guilty that I can't indulge requests like that, or, even worse, I have to say no because I'm already going off to complete a scene that I scheduled with someone two weeks ago. I get it looks bad, but it's the way it is. To compensate, I try to engage in lounges when I have free time, and try to remain accessible when it comes to offering/receiving scene requests. I've been stood up a lot of times when I've scheduled time with people, whether something comes up the evening of or they've simply forgotten. That is also the way it is. I try not to take it too personally.

I don't require someone to be my friend to RP with me. I appreciate when someone is easy-going and engaging (and not going 'RP?' and leaving me to figure out the logistics), but I'm always happy to share the workload when it comes to staging scenes. In scene, I'll do my best to hook someone into plots I may know about, and when I have a scene with a friendly person, I will work hard behind the scenes to recommend them OOCly to friends.

What does turn me off is when someone comes in with an entitlement to RP, and I can taste the resentment within the first few seconds of interaction. I can't help if I schedule. I can't help that I only have minimal time. Deal with it, or don't deal with it. I, or you, or anyone is not owed RP by virtue of putting work into apping on a game. That's the nature of the beast, and among games I've either had a wealth of opportunity, or a truly shit time where I'd log in to find the story has progressed ten chapters past what I hoped to do. It's no one's fault. If someone approaches me with the sort of accusatory tone like it's my fault we haven't RPed, or someone else's fault they're not getting RP, it's already super awkward, and the very last thing I want to do is scene with them.

Which segues into point #2. Game cultures vary. I've been on games where you have to schedule to get anything. I've been on games where I was looked at funny for not auto-joining public grid scenes or waiting in IC rooms to get RP, and asking in the lounge was considered odd. Playerbases can be so variable that I just can't assume much. I think this agrees with a lot of the replies on this thread, and people are helpfully offering specific games whose PBs prefer not to schedule everything as rigourously as I would.

I find, however, the people who get the most RP are the same people who are doing the most work to get it. People who know exactly what they want, and aren't afraid to chase, corner, and pin down people with invitations to do things -- and they do it skillfully (they make scenes about the other person, they run something as an official event, etc etc). I think we have to put in a disproportionate amount of work into this hobby to get what we want; it's the nature of a cooperative environment.

While I am personally delighted by these ideas for commands to help isolated players get out of uncomfortable scenes, part of me is unsure whether current games out there will implement them, and whether staff would just depend on their use not to take further action on questionable cases, but just go 'well, the command gets them out of a bad situation, we don't need to arbitrate further.' I am constantly baffled by the lack of concern that seems to persist on so many games.

My own case in point: I just commented on Empire State Heroes' thread with a warning that I'm absolutely certain DownWithOPP (who, like Rex, is another famous predatory case) is currently on their game, and without directly naming anyone, gave a pretty substantive clue where they need to look and figure out the sameness in pose writing and behavioural quirks. From that, I had a few current players on the game DM me to confirm the identity (they all knew who I was talking about), and admit that he's already driven off female players, and was complained to staff though he has never been told to leave.

Though I do not personally play there, and am some strange MSB voice, I was still hoping one of the active staff members on this forum would at least DM me to ask about this. No one did.

And it's dispiriting. When I've opened and administrated games, I've received pushback for being OK with pre-bans on players that I know have demonstrated long records of predatory or abusive behaviour, and I allow them zero opportunity to repeat anything on any space where I have final say. I've had it argued that it's more 'fair' of me to allow them a chance to join, and then be banned when they commit some actionable offence. But this stretch for fairness ends with someone being preyed upon, or hurt.

When it comes to these cases hiding their identity, I personally find they have a harder time hiding their behaviour over whatever stretch of time, and MSB has been an invaluable resource for me to put two-and-two together, and realize problem cases to deal with proactively. In which case, I have and will pre-emptively strike before they can do something that merits a warning or ban.

I've found this hobby in a whole to be very demonstrative about 'what is fair.' And staffers are very, very demonstrative to have their games look 100% fair, because, yeah, any threat of bias can sink games fast. I think that kind of culture has allowed repeat predatory behaviour to thrive, because if you get 100 chances on 100 new games, do you ever need to change? I just don't understand how some people who behave so reprehensibly are given so many chances.

@Ghost I definitely don't disagree with you.

I know problem cases love to disguise themselves, and that internet anonymity is a thing that can quickly favour people who work covertly/isolate people/conduct their questionable business on the down-low, but at the same time, I am sure we are a very incestuous, insular hobby. We are a considerable group of people, perhaps, but with so much crossover that I think just having a basic mode of communication (like MSB) allows us to reasonably track the bad eggs.

I guess there's just that side of me that is surprised that more people don't.

And I totally get why -- those are the reasons you posted. No time, no inclination, no taste to get involved with 'forum gossip' that's not directly happening in their game, and -- yeah -- no desire to have the playerbase diminish if a problem player gets booted and all his/her friends go with it.

Example: I had an apper on a game. Behaviours began, and it was brought to me and other staffers -- and not just by actual players on the game -- that this apper had threatened the life of someone in the past. The accusation was taken seriously, and work went to confirm the apper's identity. It was confirmed without a doubt, and the apper was banned. Hilariously, one of the apper's friends showed up a while later to berate the choice of 'not giving the apper a chance, and how our monumental unfairness reflects on the game.' Our response: whatever, bye.

I can see the case where some games might respond more anxiously, and knee-jerk the 'oh no, we lost two prospective players maybe, and now there might be trashtalk about our game.'

Some games may not care, and some games may just care too much.

@Apos Agreed.

I don't get this much, personally, because I usually app games with a few friends (and sometimes a lot of friends), or with friends there with already established roles. Right out from the gates, I have people I trust who are willing to show me the ropes, and within the safety of a group, I'm usually not targetted.

I am positive the prime targets are new players who app alone, and are largely dependent on the kindness of strangers to win them a place among the PB. And the outreach one must do to get others to care about your character attracts predatory types easy.

@reversed APPARENTLY

I think I lost my temper at the time because my universe cannot comprehend Lovecraft being so important and life-changing a topic that people have to pull out that word without employing a moment's empathy toward who may be in the room and may feel hurt hearing it in what they may hope is a safe space. BUT NOPE GOTTA VOMIT SEMANTIC FACT, IT IS THE NERDY WAY >:|

@GreenFlashlight Haha, I definitely didn't say the other was perfect either. I experience it too, and my gender has made me a target of harassment, abuse, and even sexual coercion attempts over my MUSH career. So lovely! I think I've also posted at length here before ranting about the rampant fetishization of queer characters -- though this is not the specific topic to talk about that. I just see a lot more community "wokeness" steered toward that than I do racial issues, especially in the last few years.

Conversely, I had to hear someone use the n-word in a lounge because 'it factored into an academic debate about Lovecraft.' Some nerds do not get it.

I've largely found MUSHes to be far more progressive when it comes to gender/sexuality politics than when it comes to race. I think largely because MUSH population is predominantly white, and that gender and sexuality issues are issues many have faced. Not so much race. Not really at all race. I know, being as European white-bred as I can be, I sure haven't. It's very alien to me, even though I've done all I can to try to learn and educate myself to the experiences of others.

Even then, whitey ass me still gets surprised!

A lot of players I've found -- generally those in the ok boomer-to-gen X age range -- haven't really updated themselves out of old mentalities, and will surprise me with old, non-PC terms (mulatto or Oriental I've seen many times, and was surprised by it) or ignorant prejudices that if they're not saying or doing anything hostile or negative toward a race, then they're not racist. Not all players in that age range, no. But it correlates.

There are also a lot of players I find that like to cling to the older tropes of game types, and elevate "normalized geekery" over what may be considered offensive. I've witnessed superhero games that keep FCs from the 1940s that my be built on or simply ARE racist cariactures ('The Mandarin', anyone? Or 'Gypsy Moth'). I've witnessed fantasy games that like to keep that Tolkien-esque golden age of racism where the evil overseas empires and races are usually going to be dark-skinned in some way.

For a recent example, I know just in Arx, I've felt many times uncomfortable just with the occasional jokey player culture of 'unleashing a crusade' on the made-up Arabic-themed empire. Even though I'm certain it's not theme trying to promote such a thing, at times I can witness a bit of slippery slope happening with how some of the playerbase receives it, and can be a little bit Too Real to be able to keep it safely in the realm of the fictional.

I think it takes a lot of care that people may not always employ, because they're too busy having fun geeking out to what feels normal and fun to your average middle-class white nerd, and sometimes having to see that Normal Geeky Fun in a different light -- potentially, an offensive light -- isn't everyone's cup of tea.

@TheOnceler Why you have to go spoiling my new top secret naked desc

@Sunny Mea culpa on the roster-steal!! :C But thank you!! I super appreciate everyone helping as I make sad baby jumps trying to leap over all the lore hurdles!

@saosmash Hahaha! No apologies! I actually love it; 'Cadenza' first for me will always be a musical term, but I am also a recovering violinist.

I am the brand new Cadenza! Also brand new entirely, and I still have no idea what I'm doing.

@Apos Agreed.

I don't get this much, personally, because I usually app games with a few friends (and sometimes a lot of friends), or with friends there with already established roles. Right out from the gates, I have people I trust who are willing to show me the ropes, and within the safety of a group, I'm usually not targetted.

I am positive the prime targets are new players who app alone, and are largely dependent on the kindness of strangers to win them a place among the PB. And the outreach one must do to get others to care about your character attracts predatory types easy.

@Ghost I definitely don't disagree with you.

I know problem cases love to disguise themselves, and that internet anonymity is a thing that can quickly favour people who work covertly/isolate people/conduct their questionable business on the down-low, but at the same time, I am sure we are a very incestuous, insular hobby. We are a considerable group of people, perhaps, but with so much crossover that I think just having a basic mode of communication (like MSB) allows us to reasonably track the bad eggs.

I guess there's just that side of me that is surprised that more people don't.

And I totally get why -- those are the reasons you posted. No time, no inclination, no taste to get involved with 'forum gossip' that's not directly happening in their game, and -- yeah -- no desire to have the playerbase diminish if a problem player gets booted and all his/her friends go with it.

Example: I had an apper on a game. Behaviours began, and it was brought to me and other staffers -- and not just by actual players on the game -- that this apper had threatened the life of someone in the past. The accusation was taken seriously, and work went to confirm the apper's identity. It was confirmed without a doubt, and the apper was banned. Hilariously, one of the apper's friends showed up a while later to berate the choice of 'not giving the apper a chance, and how our monumental unfairness reflects on the game.' Our response: whatever, bye.

I can see the case where some games might respond more anxiously, and knee-jerk the 'oh no, we lost two prospective players maybe, and now there might be trashtalk about our game.'

Some games may not care, and some games may just care too much.

While I am personally delighted by these ideas for commands to help isolated players get out of uncomfortable scenes, part of me is unsure whether current games out there will implement them, and whether staff would just depend on their use not to take further action on questionable cases, but just go 'well, the command gets them out of a bad situation, we don't need to arbitrate further.' I am constantly baffled by the lack of concern that seems to persist on so many games.

My own case in point: I just commented on Empire State Heroes' thread with a warning that I'm absolutely certain DownWithOPP (who, like Rex, is another famous predatory case) is currently on their game, and without directly naming anyone, gave a pretty substantive clue where they need to look and figure out the sameness in pose writing and behavioural quirks. From that, I had a few current players on the game DM me to confirm the identity (they all knew who I was talking about), and admit that he's already driven off female players, and was complained to staff though he has never been told to leave.

Though I do not personally play there, and am some strange MSB voice, I was still hoping one of the active staff members on this forum would at least DM me to ask about this. No one did.

And it's dispiriting. When I've opened and administrated games, I've received pushback for being OK with pre-bans on players that I know have demonstrated long records of predatory or abusive behaviour, and I allow them zero opportunity to repeat anything on any space where I have final say. I've had it argued that it's more 'fair' of me to allow them a chance to join, and then be banned when they commit some actionable offence. But this stretch for fairness ends with someone being preyed upon, or hurt.

When it comes to these cases hiding their identity, I personally find they have a harder time hiding their behaviour over whatever stretch of time, and MSB has been an invaluable resource for me to put two-and-two together, and realize problem cases to deal with proactively. In which case, I have and will pre-emptively strike before they can do something that merits a warning or ban.

I've found this hobby in a whole to be very demonstrative about 'what is fair.' And staffers are very, very demonstrative to have their games look 100% fair, because, yeah, any threat of bias can sink games fast. I think that kind of culture has allowed repeat predatory behaviour to thrive, because if you get 100 chances on 100 new games, do you ever need to change? I just don't understand how some people who behave so reprehensibly are given so many chances.

@Carex Oh, he's a predatory player who's been surfacing recently among a lot of MUSHes -- generally full of pathological lying and coercive behaviours to sexually prey on women players. There's an entire terrifying Hogpit thread about him.

He's also been endemic on comic mushes, and I've recognized his writing from personal run-ins -- he harassed a lot of my friends, before running off with his typical 'I have cancer' routine.