Posts made by Rook

When coding, I tend to 'shut down' on the Coder bit, but be active on another bit to chat, talk, answer questions. I got fed up with Spawns constantly distracting me when in that heads-down mode, but they were great at all other times.

I'm sorry. If a player cannot 'believe' a female staffer, they need to be destroyed by fire and removed from the game. That shit is so 1950s crap.

Kitten-in-training? Or is this the type of place where you have to sneak in and out of?

Clearly not real. Massuesse does not have oil bottle on belt.

Yeah, I was curious what that was about to, but wasn't about to glorify it by asking. Seemed pretty passive-aggressive.

I want to claim that work triggers me so hard that I need time off. Would that be sick days, not vacation? Wish I could run from the real world like half of these extreme cases get off doing.

"The US is Canada's Mexico."
-- Some comedian

Eh, I don't think that works, @Cupcake, in the discussion of academia and insult that @Ganymede and @Ataru are having up above.

If a student flails at a singular word being used in proper context of a teaching situation, then that student is either ignoring that the teacher is using said context properly, or they are super-sensitive. The conversation above is talking about the latter.

I think the conversation here is when adequate context and intent is not only given, but supercedes the expectation because the conversation itself is happening in a forum designed and built for exchanging ideas at a higher level. That's, like, the mission statement of a University or College, right?

Someone doesn't get to sit in on a medical lecture about the difficulties encountered by prosthetic-wearing patients, and get all upset and lodge complaints just because the word "disabled" is used when talking about the victim being pinned in a car for seven hours and loosing her leg. It is STILL the word used by governments, signs and non-profit organizations to describe the condition.

I agree with Roz. Especially if I am doing so as staff on a game with a privacy expectation. It'd warrant at least a warning, for a staffer, and a stern talking to as a player to make sure that what they did was out of line with the policies of the game.

I would then take initiative and talk to the [alleged] stalker, simply telling them that I was made aware of certain things and that these and these are the policies of the game and my expectations of what constitutes good player behavior in that context. I would be clear that I understand that it is allegations, but even as allegations, I consider them worth a conversation.

@Meg Then it had it's intended effect.

@Meg ouch.

I don't want to liken running a dog-fighting ring with political stance. One is "forgiveable" and the other isn't. To be clear, if someone was an unforgiveable piece of shit in the real world, I wouldn't want anything to do with them? That includes RPing.

Reasons for not associating with someone on a game:

• convicted sexual offender
• runs a dog-fighting ring
• long established history of OOC undermining and destruction to "friends"
• drives a Fiat

Non-reasons:

• Political stance
• Gender/Faith/Credo/Ethnicity
• inexperience with system, MUing
• typing ability (though this would be touchy after a while)

In general, I won't preclude someone from RP or a game if it is a protected hiring status type of thing. That's a pretty universal set of things that anyone should be safe in. That's an example.

I think that Staff should be concerned with someone's impact to their game. Players should be concerned with a player's impact to them personally, their RP, and so on. If a player is a vile [Republican|Democrat] in internet chatrooms, Facebook, whatever, that should have no bearing on their participation on a game, nor in whether or not I'll RP with them. It has no bearing on the game, nor me.

I just think that things have shifted to a world in America (young America?) where outcry is a goal. People look for something to cry out about, to attract attention onto someone, all in the name of activism and whatever social agenda that they are closest to.

People ignore context. They just cry out: "[He|She] said the word ______, clearly a [racist|sexist|bigot]!" to draw ire and fingers onto someone. They, in turn, gain notoriety in their little agenda-circle.

But, @ataru, being the victim is what draws attention to you! Social media is teaching this new generation how attention feels, and they are learning to garner it in all ways possible, some of those ways are very unhealthy.

When society is calling the recent political stress syndromes up onto the same levels as combat PTSD, there is a huge red flag. Conversations about politics should never cause as much emotional damage as living through actual combat, a shooting, or a rape, or anything else that would cause genuine PTSD. Politics, by their very nature, are conversations about differing opinions. If you are traumatized by conversations with differing opinions, something else is seriously wrong.

@Derp
But public opinion of your Own Rule is entirely a valid thing. If you put a rule on your game that allows the staff to sell that mandatory staff-only email to marketers, just because you want to use that to pay for your hosting, your playerbase gets the right to have an outcry over it. It is how games that have crazy rules and cultures are made to die. The MU community will not let bad behavior thrive, in most cases, and it teaches the rest of us NOT to do that.

If you want to give someone a second or third or even a fourth chance on your game, I don't think this would be an issue. Several people have voiced that they would be forgiving, would give that same opportunity. I think @Ganymede is right that ignoring that sheer bulk of evidence is a irresponsible thing to do as a staff. The evidence is overwhelming if it spans a decade plus.

This thread was started to level the conversation into greyness, so as to allow for abstract discussion. I think it can be agreed that the case in which we are specifically referring to is an extreme outlier to this conversation, yes? Just because this discussion is warranted (this is one of those exercises in learning from things), doesn't mean that you have to like it. This seems to be more a discussion about how MSB wants to set expectation on behavior from MSB members when this shit happens.

@Thenomain
Wait, what? In MUdom? Oh yes it is. It is how we operate. It is what most MU*s are all about, outside of theme!

@Auspice
I think that MSB is much the same crowd as WORA, we've all just aged and grown wiser with the scars and limping of experience. And yes, the ex was entirely the reason it all happened in the first place. Live and learn.

All I'm trying to say is that on the one hand, MSB encourages stricter, tighter staffing... but then is quick (I should say 'was quick', in the WORA days) to roast a staff for doing just that. Let's just take that into account in the conversation here, as I feel it is relevant.

Well, I've been on the receiving end of the WORA ire when I myself booted a player from our game a decade ago, for repeated offenses. I was roasted on here for being overbearing and not following our own 3-strike policies, because I just decided that enough was enough. Trying to raise up a group of players against the game was enough, in my opinion, to show someone the door.

So be careful. WORA didn't like when players were the first to come on and start roasting a game for mistreatment by staff. Once roasted, I couldn't seem to defend myself. So there is definitely a culture of CYA in MU*dom, as a Staffer. People don't want to earn their game the reputation of having knee-jerk reactionists as staffers, people who overreact, jump the gun, or any number of other cliche phrases you want to toss out there.

With that said, I'd do it again today and not give a shit what this board thought, if I truly felt that I was protecting my MU*.

@Tinuviel
There is a difference between ME avoiding Bob and STAFF regulating a no-contact order. I believe I also had a caveat on that post that spoke about venting, or one-time things:

*Granted, a venting wouldn't warrant this reaction from me. We all vent, I get that. But those that repeatedly bitch tend to be very destructive to games, foment upset on that game, and drive players away whether you realize that they are doing it or not.

The difference here being a single incident and repeated incidents?

@Arkandel
Okay, I totally understand where you're coming from. And to be clear, it isn't that I dislike no-contacts, but I just don't think that (with the example you gave) that a public no-contact ban on RP from a single non-witnessed incident would be my course of decision. I think we are agreeing here, I just needed to come to understand what you were illustrating. My own slowness.