Can we stop accusing everyone who isn't singing the same song at throat-ripping volume of playing on these games and secretly wanting to get their pedophilia on now? Is that something we can do?
Because it seems like that's something we should also fucking do.
Secondly, my main problem with this entire conversation - especially your parts of it - is that it is bluster. If you want to do something about it, like reporting it to law enforcement, or internet watchdogs, or whomever... do so. We're not the MUing police. Not by a long fuckin' shot. We don't have authority, or impact, or influence enough to just decide "Okay, MUing is banning this thing now."
Thirdly, this entire conversation needs to stop. You need to go take a break, write emails or call who you need to call, because us chatting about it isn't going to change anything. Literally ever.
Seconding this in full. Thank you for sparing me the effort.
@Tinuviel This.
I don't see anyone supporting the game here. (Maybe Pandora? But frankly I don't really see her going on about how great it is, either, and am not going to put those words in her mouth.)
Again, we're seeing conflation of 'condones and supports pedophilia and is clearly ignorant in regard to it' being directed at people working in legal cases regarding it and survivors of it, and similar, simply because they're not screaming bloody murder at the same volume as Ghost.
Sorry, but that isn't how logic works. That's not how anything works.
@surreality Here is what I'm implying.
That many of this people have severe levels of 'not okay' with slut shaming, racism, homophobia, sexism, and creeping,
Accurate!
but when it comes to actually using the word 'pedophile' to describe people on these games whose kink is simulated child fucking, I think too many people break out the 10 foot "dont rock the boat" pole.
Not remotely accurate.
This has been presented in a variety of ways already. Like the 'playing a racist/sexist character on a historical game must necessarily be doing so to engage in RL racism', the insistence that someone RPing this must be an RL pedophile is simply false.
Is this -- and any other permutation of 'they RP it on a game, thus they must really in RL' -- sometimes accurate? Probably. They are still not implicit.
Is there a bit of "*WHOA, HEY NOW I...have a friend of a friend who...plays on that place. How about you just leave m-
Yeah, again, more 'asking for a friend' shade being thrown directly at everyone. I don't play on either of these games, have never played on either of these games, and have no interest in doing so.
that friend alone!*"?
I don't actually know anyone who does, either.
Yea, a little bit.
...a little bit?
Regardless, the priority balance between actually keeping pedophiles out of the community versus regimentally keeping an eye out for slut shamers is a bit askew, in my opinion.
The only person who has been railing about slut shaming in this thread is you.
Now, I ignore plenty of threads around these parts, but it hasn't been a recent topic of conversation in any that I follow for some time, either.
Let's be adults.
Some people in this thread are behaving like adults. You have consistently not been one of them. Please knock it off.
There's no grandiose high school pep rally election going on here,
This has nothing to do with anything.
and not that there's any leadership here,
The mods here actually do pay attention to issues on the board. I don't agree with all of their calls over the ages, but having seen them work to protect the board directly, I'm not going to throw shade at them, either. I see no reason for you to be doing it, either. This is from out of nowhere, so far as I can tell.
I dont derive validity from my opinions based on whether or not people like you judge them a 9.5.
You shouldn't. Also, what's a 'people like [me]?' Please elaborate.
The difference between myself and some others is that I'm willing to call it 'simulated pedophilia', which I gather is an inconvenience to the people on this forum who partake in it, as is the suggestion to contact a watchdog service.
I do not know a single person on this forum who partakes in it. Not one.
Have I seen people do it on Shang, years ago, when it was permitted? Yep. Are any of them on the forum? Not that I know of. Am I still in touch with a single one of them? Nope. Did I ever partake in it with them? Nope. Did I distance myself from them when I found out? Yep. Did any of them express a view other than disgust and horror over the notion of someone doing any of these things in real life with an actual child? Nope.
In the end, there's really no middle ground. There are people who do not approve of pedophilia (simulated or not), and people who are fine with providing sandbox space to partake in it.
So the person prosecuting a pedophile, who doesn't share your views precisely, is a supporter of pedophilia. The survivor of a pedophile online who does not share your views precisely is a supporter of pedophilia.
This is what you're saying. It is a repugnant claim.
Clearly, my opinion is that it would be proper and positive for the community to do their part to keep pedophilia out of it,
Considering the volume of games that do not permit it, this is the standard attitude. It is not revolutionary or novel. It is not rare. It's not uncommon. It is already the standard default. It is so much the standard default that it is big news -- see this thread as evidence -- when a game permits it at all.
but if they choose not to
See above. The vast majority of games prohibit this content.
I guess that's just one more consideration as to why the hobby isn't keeping new people for long.
...so this doesn't hold water and is another rallying cry/strawman/conflation of things that don't conflate.
Priorities i guess.
This is exactly the sort of passive aggressive shade-throwing this thread does not need.
Just not okay with online pedophilia havens.
...and this. Again: you do not need to behave as you have been behaving to convince anyone that pedophilia is a problem.
Implying that anyone not behaving the way you are behaving is cheering on, or participating in, pedophilia online? Is laughable on its face.
Pyrefox nails it.
@Tinuviel Yeah. Mediawiki -- I can't speak for wikidot or other variants, and I doubt wikidot would be super keen on hosting something like that -- doesn't have much in the way of fine-grained privacy controls or filtering for content. It's just not part of the standard structure, and is counter to their concept, so they develop against the possibility for this in extensions/etc. There are extensions that try in a half-assed way, but they aren't the greatest and break often.
(Otherwise, just practically speaking, there would be a whole lot more people could potentially do with it that has nothing to do with these issues, which is sorta sad, because some would be super hobby-useful.)
@Tinuviel Yeah, I get that. Unfortunately, I'm talking about... stuff that isn't funny and can be profoundly disturbing to stumble across visuals of (that often don't have the same impact in text). There's a lot of very violent rape imagery, amputation and snuff imagery, etc. Not censored, no limits on what can be shown (aside from no pictures of real world children of any kind from what I recall).
I would really, really never want to see a wiki of that, children or no children.
@Tinuviel I can browse a WoD wiki and turn up my nose plenty, sure.
Image links in Shang +finger remain to date the #1 source of 'I will never unsee that' in my life.
"It is my own stupid fault for clicking the link," I can say, because I know it's an image of a thing. A random page of nightmare fuel loading up after clicking a name? No thanks.
@Ghost I am not entirely sure if you have a reasonable notion of how you're coming across in this thread. While you showed your work on the leaps of logic in this case, there are plenty more, along with some spectacularly gross conflations and insinuations. The subject matter is awful enough. It doesn't need your 'help' for others to become aware that it is awful.
Things like 'it requires more staff to manage and monitor, and additional hosting costs' are seemingly not on the radar here. Shang hosts intermittent donation drives to keep the lights of the MUX on alone. (I don't even want to consider what would happen if they were also hosting a wiki for thousands of players with a rapid turnover, or what content would be on it.)
Sometimes it's the simple shit.
Regardless, per Pandora, the game in question does this.
I wouldn't look to you as the voice on this issue for multiple reasons, because the gonzo journalism 'sling out worst case scenarios, absurd conflations, insinuations that no one who isn't screaming the same song you are at the same volume isn't aware of the issues (or supports this stuff happening), and scare tactics' approach is hitting the poor taste mark unto itself.
(Rinel, RDC, Ganymede, y'all have made very reasoned and thoughtful contributions here and thank you for doing so in the face of this.)
...what sort of website would someone want PenDes to have? Again, maybe think this through a bit.
"Why doesn't Shang have a wiki?"
^ Consider this question with even a modicum of seriousness and you'll rapidly become very glad they don't. (I think players started one on their own, but I have no idea what was up with that. Not my circus, not my monkeys.)
@Auspice Ditto. Already on block! Thanks for the heads-up.
@Auspice Didn't recognize that meme. If so, oh, hell yeah.
@Auspice Oh, it's him again? Le sigh. No wonder the question was so completely irrelevant and dirt stupid.
There is something to be said for transparency in the bid to keep actual children safe. A conversation about what steps any game, from Cyberrun to My Little Ponies MU to games in the process of opening, can take to further ensure that parents and internet porn-blockers can stay one step ahead of children wandering into adult play spaces would be much more mildly constructive.
^ This.
@Paulie-Walnuts No clue, and I don't particularly care.
Not remotely relevant to the point in any case.
If the question is 'how would you feel about these two sex games being added to a parental control filter'? The answer is 'anything that is meant for an 18+ audience should be added to that filter, not just two sex games'.
It's not complicated.
I would hope that any game with an 18+ player age policy is added to a 'do not allow kids to access this' filter.
That means probably 95% of the games in the hobby if not more, and I am perfectly comfortable with this for the reasons bored describes a few posts up.
@ZombieGenesis I forget the title off the top of my head, but their shorts series around the 'cursed record' was actually pretty different and interesting, too. Have to agree; it's one of the things that's worth it. I don't bother with any of the others, but that one has a fair range of stuff, and it's good stuff.
