Consent

[Cenghiz]

I never had any kind of important emotional trauma in my past.. perhaps you didn't either, Desertman. So we won't be able to understand how someone experienced bad things IRL can feel when the scene is replayed, even in a game. We'd better keep the consent rule.

You don't need to see every detail to play the game, eh? Use your imagination IRL while you fade.

[Desertman]

Fade?

Oh I have no problem with fading. Thats just fine....But if someone dosent consent...you arent even allowed to fade and assume it happened. If the rule was...."IF they do not wish to view the scene played out you must fade"...I would be just fine....I never once said in my post that one must see every detail...I am a big fan of the fade option.

[Hymwen]

If you dont want me to take what I want from you...Get tough or fucking die...

Wow, I really hope that few people are of that opinion.

[Xygax]

Desertman:  The staff have repeatedly and consistently come down on the side of the "pansies" with respect to this policy, and I do not think that will change anytime soon.

People who might think they're up for anything haven't seen some of the "anything" I've seen people start to roleplay out.  We're not talking here about anime-style rape where by the end of the "scene" we find out both participants were really into it all along.  I have personally witnessed portions of at least a handful of scenes that genuinely disturbed me OOCly, and I wasn't even an IC "victim" in them.

I like Armageddon's edge, but there are some really dark places that the "consent rule" shields our players from, unless they wish to explore them.  It is still possible, after a brief interruption, to continue with any scene, if everyone involved is willing.  And the positive result of that brief interruption so vastly outweights the potential negatives of a mildly delayed or "jarred" scene that I cannot possibly see waiving it via some coded flag.

There aren't enough bits in ginka's RAM to express in a bit-vector the enormous variety of dark places that might be visited if some coded "consent toggle" were to be attempted.

Believe me, if there were, I'd have most of those bits toggled on.  But that doesn't mean I want to see the whole spectrum of possibility.  And I like having the opportunity to bail out before I do.

-- X

ps -- The "you can't rape someone at all if they don't consent" clause wasn't the issue the original poster brought up, by the way.  That won't be changing either, though.

[Desertman]

Oh I know it isnt going to be changed. I just wanted to voice my opinion on the topic. I had no intention of even changing anyone else's view points on the issue or swaying them in any way on thier stand. I simply wanted to be heard.

[Malken]

The question is.. At what point does it become "too much"?

You might think that rape and torture isn't such a big deal for you, others might think it is.. Then you can have your explicit flag on.. What keeps me from doing seriously disturbing things to your PC? I won't go into details, but let's just say.. What if I have a truly disturbed mind and my definition of rape or torture goes over what you'd expect from it?

What if I have some other seriously disturbing thoughts, and I see your explicit consent on, does it give me the right to do pretty much what I want to your PC, or do I have to follow a "common sense" raping and torture scenario that I hope you won't find too disturbing, or can I go full-japanese insane torture movie on you in details?

I still think asking the PC before, "I'm going to do so and so to your PC, do you agree or would you rather fade it?" is the better choice..

[Bebop]

Hrm, I really don't think consent flags or no consent flags would make much of a difference.  Just asking the person makes sure that they can't/most likely won't be e-mailing the mood freaking out because they weren't asked/forced whatever.  And starting out as a newb it takes a long time to learn the code.  I would guess many newbs would not be aware of that code starting out whatever.  I think it could be a good idea but it's just not really necessary.

As far as the consent rule, I'm all for asking consent.  The only thing I do not like is the fact that if someone says no you can not rape me, you can not tortute me then even if it is in character you can not do it.  It's kind of like saying no to a militia member for arresting you.  No you can not arrest me because I don't want to do prison RP, I'm not comfortable with that etc.  The rule is only supposed to be used when someone is completely emotionally inable to RP out being raped and having been raped.  Which I suppose I can understand some people might but at the same time if you can handle playing in Zalanthas it would leave me to believe that you wouldn't have such a hard time when you've come to except the harshness of the world.  It's kind of odd when someone would have you in that position and it would be IC but then you have to come up with some reason you wouldn't.

I think the truly good RPers though would just try to find some other creative thing to do with their victim (shrug but that's just me).  I can see both sides of it.  The great thing about the game though is that there is so much room for creativity.  Everyone can say one thing should be this way or that way, but I say just deal with each other person by person and if you're a good RPer (at least a creative one) you'll find a way to work around other people's limitations.

[Anonymous]

The question is.. At what point does it become "too much"?

You might think that rape and torture isn't such a big deal for you, others might think it is.. Then you can have your explicit flag on.. What keeps me from doing seriously disturbing things to your PC? I won't go into details, but let's just say.. What if I have a truly disturbed mind and my definition of rape or torture goes over what you'd expect from it?

Because as your chosen victim, I still have the ultimate control. I can tell you where to go using OOC. I can wish up or write the account if you won't stop. I can even just say "screw this" and cut link. Nothing forces me to endure it.

[Xygax]

The only thing I do not like is the fact that if someone says no you can not rape me, you can not tortute me then even if it is in character you can not do it.

Just to clarify, this policy only holds for rape.  You can still fade-to-black-torture someone even if they do not give consent for it.  You cannot fade-to-black rape someone without their consent.  The idea behind the policy is that some players do not wish to play out the aftermath of rape.  For whatever cultural reason, the aftermath of torture is easier to stomach, and so we still allow that (though of course even then the torturee can still choose to be stored if they wish).

-- X

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I used to be very much against the consent policy. I felt that it catered to emos and the like.

Then I started reading a little about rape victims in RL and how it seriously effects them. I'm not willing to lose a great player just because I think I should force my raping/sodomizing character upon them.

I don't like the idea that if they say no rape scene, it doesn't happen to them at all on any level, because that is just somewhat unrealistic, but, again, I am not willing to lose a great player or even a crappy player because they can't deal with the brutality of a rape scene.

Those of us who have not been raped probably can not fathom the emotions it would invoke in us, especially if you are already an emotional person.

So, I fully support the consent rule.

[ShaLeah]

I wasn't gonna say anything else... Meh.  Damn you all for sucking me back in!

Those of us who have not been raped probably can not fathom the emotions it would invoke in us, especially if you are already an emotional person.

There are those of us who HAVE been raped (and worse) who would be able to roleplay the aftermath without going through the virtual act but that is only because of experience.  You can't play a rape victim without knowing what it's like to lose that control completely.  Having been in game for a few years now and never having seen it, I hope, PRAY that I never do.  I still don't want the interruption of OOC if I have determined before hand what is and what is not acceptible for ME to witness.  Again, beating a dead horse, it's the jarring interruption in the flow of roleplay.
(and before anyone else says 'deal with it', I do, I have and will continue to do so tyvm)

So, I fully support the consent rule.

This is NOT about the consent rule or whether it should be changed or removed.  Doesn't anyone get that?

It's about putting a pretty color ribbon around it that you can change at your leisure.  Today yes, tomorrow no, next week new character yes, a month from now with another maybe.

Stop trying to make this about what it's not.

It's not about the consent rule being removed.
It's not about people being seen as pansies if they choose not to play something out.
It's not about how horrible rape and torture are.

It's about an option that gives the player the CHOICE to let people know AHEAD of time what they can and cannot stomach. And, as the consent rules state:
If someone is instigating roleplay that makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop.

The consent policy doesn't change. *sigh*  I done now.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

ShaLeah, you can stop losing your temper or I'll send Candi over there.  :twisted:

And I'll watch.

[mansa]

I would only agree to have it in if:

A) It defaults to NO every single time you log into your character

and

B) You can only check the status of anothers consent level once per hour, or more depending on your RANK within SPECIAL CLANS (i.e. templars can check 5 times an hour)

[ShaLeah]

Because I love you all:

http://www.digitalfilms.com/play.php?id=753242

Remember these?!

I like the old characters better but it works.

[spawnloser]

A few things:

In my experience, Halaster's reputation is NOT deserved.  He doesn't enjoy killing people, he just doesn't shy away from it.

Also, people have moods.  At some times, they are willing to accept something and at others, they are not.  Having this flag system idea in would allow for a person to forget that s/he had set something yes, but aren't comfortable with it now...and now, all of a sudden, someone is doing something to this person's character that the player is not comfortable with.  The consent rules prevents this from happening.  People can be emotionally fragile beings and I do NOT want to see someone become uncomfortable with the game simply because the consent rules were bypassed in ANY way, including accidently and on the part of the person who is no uncomfortable.

Finally, on the matter of people understanding the emotions of someone that was raped, those of us that haven't been can NOT understand.  Those of us that have been raped should NEVER have to roleplay through those emotions, bringing something that was a traumatic experience back to torture these players even more.

I firmly support the way consent is currently granted and would not want it to change to something like has been suggested.

[Jherlen]

Here's my take:

Armageddon MUD is strong stuff. It's not a game for the weak at heart. The very fact that we ALLOW explicit scenes takes us a lot further than many other games go.

But if you want to widen the playerbase, you have to accept players who may not be into all that. Some players love mudsex. That's great. Some will take it further and be okay with BDSM/torture, some may even not mind if their PCs get raped. That's all good. But a lot of people want nothing at all to do with any of that.

If I was a new player and I was just discovering the game and noticed we had actual set flags for rape/torture scenes, I'm not sure what I would think. I'm fairly sure a lot of newbies would have a negative reaction to that. Even if we do allow those scenes between consenting parties, going so far as to code things into the game for them sends a message I'm not sure we want to send.

I'm for explicitly asking and receiving consent through the OOC channel each time you want to range into the realm of graphic stuff that some people may not like. (The system we have now.) Anything else, I think, is a weaker solution. If even one person out of 100 is having a bad day and forgets to turn off a consent flag, then gets stuck in a scene they don't want to be in, that's one person too many.

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

While I can sort of understand where Desertman and others are coming from, I just have to ask- how much raping/getting raped were you planning on doing, anyway?
The consent policy shouldn't negatively effect your play very much, but it might positively effect some one else's play by an immeasurable amount.
Keep it as is, I say.

[Sanvean]

Still on the road till Sunday, so I'll be brief, but basically to me the problems with automating consent outweigh the benefits.  Accordingly, I strongly oppose the idea of automating it and have no plans to see any such system implemented.  Other people have spoken eloquently and well as to some of the reasons behind this point of view, so I'll leave it at that.

[Zacharai]

As a former rape counselor, I would not play Arm if it had weaker consent regulations.

[MoosesRock]

While the little movie was cute, it illustrates one reason I would not want a flag sent for consent.

I personally would not want every Joe/Sally my pc passes on the way to the Gaj to have that information at their fingertips. It's really none of their business. Regardless of how I set the flags, to me, it's entirely too much information about my pc available to all with little or no roleplay.

I don't find the few seconds and lines it takes to "OOC: Hey, mind if I tie you up and spank you? OOC: No, but I'd rather we take turns " all that jarring or mood breaking. I much prefer it to the alternative.

[amoeba]

I personally would not want every Joe/Sally my pc passes on the way to the Gaj to have that information at their fingertips. It's really none of their business. Regardless of how I set the flags, to me, it's entirely too much information about my pc available to all with little or no roleplay.

A extremely valuble point made here. It is also -far- too much information given about the -player- themselves, portraying to the world that they are uncomfortable with rape scenes.  This to me is an unneeded intrusion into their privacy. It is one thing asking for consent at the onset of an event. It is quite another displaying the player's preferences at all times, to all people.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of how I set the flags, to me, it's entirely too much information about my pc available to all with little or no roleplay.

Actually, it is not information about your PC at all. It's really information about you as a player.

But fine. As with many potentially worthwhile features, let this too die the fear of abuse death.

[X-D]

First, I have not read the thread other then page one.

But, I like the idea and have also suggested it before.

The complaint one person had about just anybody seeing what they will concent to is baseless since they will see it anyway if the ask.

Also, everybody always uses the "but what if they have a change of heart" or "what if they forget to set" reasons to not implament such flags. Including Halaster.

To this I say, Oh come on, this is SOOOOO easy to negate.

Simple 3 steps.

First log into account and have a consent on/off toggle.

Consent on means that when you enter the game world you will be in limbo untill consent flags set for that session.

Consent off means you will log in same as we do now and your consent flags will all be set to no. Meaning people either have to ask OOC (YUCK) or simply keep things clean.

Consent can be toggled off any time in game, but not back on unless you log out.

This is the way I would go about it, a bit of work maybe, but simple in form and function, failsafe.

And of course, A spoken OOC would always overide.

Also, I would make it a sep command to see flags, just for these people all worried for some reason that people will see the flags (still don't get it and really sit on the side of SUCK IT UP!) and have the command log, least then if staff wants they cen contact the person and explain why they don't like them using the command 37 times a minute.

[Morfeus]

I simply do not want anyone who looks at my char to know what I'd play out and what not. And I do not want to know that about others as well, unless I need to know it (eg. I am going to torture their character).

[amoeba]

The complaint one person had about just anybody seeing what they will concent to is baseless since they will see it anyway if the ask.

This is not baseless and let me explain why.  The difference between a flag and explicit concent is more extreme and personal.  Yes, they will know if they ask, however that case is limited in scope.  It only applies to the one extreme case where where an attempt is actually made.  A flag however is perstaint, it travels with the player and can be looked upon at any time. It denotes to anyone who cares to look as to an OOC preference of the player. Tell me anywhere else in the game that the player is required to leak OOC information about themselves to the mud population.  In practice having a flag requires that you do that, not toggling it on implies consent, so the player is screwed either way. To be blunt, it is no one's business how a player feels oocly about it until the need to ask consent arises.

I'll be honest, currently I'll not let it get to consent.  One example, I had one occasion with a player of mine where she was presented with a situation where this might have occured. (yes I'll admit, I have played a couple of female characters) If the scene had progressed to the point where I thought the people would have attempted it, I would have simply premtively attacked, either to their deaths or my own characters.  I have no desire to play into these scenes.  And I tell you, I have no desire to wear a damned, scarlet OOC flag at all times in order to serve at the convience of a limited number of players who don't want to "break character".

edit: toned down the rhetoric.