18+? Age requirements.

[staggerlee]

I've been considering the current age policies for the game, and find them somewhat troubling.  We allow all ages, though suggest the game has mature content.  I would very much like to see an age requirement of 18+ or as appropriate according to individual states.

The content of the game is at times extremely explicit, and I don't mean only the things we're expected to ask consent for.  I can only imagine the reaction of your average parent that walked in to find their 15 year old mudsexing, torturing, or just being bombarded with the more run of the mill violence and obscenities you encounter in this game. 

I realize that there are a fair number of players that are currently under 18, but that's what's troubling.  It would cover the ass of adults who don't feel comfortable interacting in this manner with minors, or who are in professions such as teaching who could find the kind of accusation that could rise from it to be extremely damaging.

I realize that people could lie about their age, but that's not something I can respond to, and would still serve to cover the ass of the adults playing.

Thoughts?  I'm not making this a poll because I don't believe statistics say much of value.

[Tisiphone]

I disagree with a minimum age mostly on the grounds of enforcement. We have no real way of proving someone's age, and putting a rule like this in place would breed contempt for the law.

[staggerlee]

I disagree with a minimum age mostly on the grounds of enforcement. We have no real way of proving someone's age, and putting a rule like this in place would breed contempt for the law.

I absolutely agree that it's unenforceable.  It's more about the legalities of the interaction with minors and the comfort level of adults. IE: Covering our asses.

[brytta.leofa]

It's more about the legalities of the interaction with minors and the comfort level of adults.

I'm afraid that "she told me she was 18!" doesn't really help.

[musashi]

Yeah, I have to say I don't think it's really needed either. If getting "caught" doing something with a potentional minor is that much of a worry to a person, no one is forcing them to RP through sex/rape/torture/ect.

As for just the run of the mill violence, I think that video games get way more graphic than our combat code 

[tortall]

Yeah, there's really no way to enforce this.

If this had been in effect when I started playing at 16, I wouldn't be here. I'm pretty sure a good 3/4ths of the current player base are either under 18, or started playing when they were under 18.

We've had discussions about many things and often end up blaming a low playerbase. Why would we want to lower this even more?

[manonfire]

I think the responsibility is on the parents of the minor, not the game.

[Bilanthri]

If this had been in effect when I started playing at 16, I wouldn't be here. I'm pretty sure a good 3/4ths of the current player base are either under 18, or started playing when they were under 18.

I feel ya here....I found Arm when I was 16 as well, now, a decade+ later I'm still loving the game. But, had I been declined as a teen, I can't see any reason why I would have ever come back.

I can see the issue of legality, but on an ethical standpoint, any teen who's savvy enough to play a text-based RP intensive game like Arm, is also savvy enough to have found out all about sex, drugs, and rock & roll from the humming terminal in front of them...I'm certainly not gonna be teaching them much new.

Or maybe I was just a good student of bad material back then. 

[UnderSeven]

If you consider this game to be like a book, which can be quite explicit, but read by any ages, I don't think there would be much of a leg to stand on with the content that goes on in game.  Furthermore I think it is unenforceable.  For lawsuit reasons though I could see tossing up an age requirement disclaimer.

[Shalooonsh]

I can see the issue of legality, but on an ethical standpoint, any teen who's savvy enough to play a text-based RP intensive game like Arm, is also savvy enough to have found out all about sex, drugs, and rock & roll from the humming terminal in front of them...I'm certainly not gonna be teaching them much new.

This is very much a truth.  In addition, some of our best roleplayers cut their teeth on Armageddon, and our game would be losing a lot of upcoming talent and creative minds if we slapped on a minimum age limit.  Just because you are young does not mean you are immature.  We might lose some players because they encounter things that make them uncomfortable, and that's just fine.  Many young people do understand that if something isn't for them, they should go elsewhere.  We would like to give them the chance to choose instead of arbitrarily telling them that they can't handle it.

And enforcement would be almost impossible.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/i_am_under_18_button

[Lizzie]

Instead of making a requirement, you could put up a tos (I did a search from the main arm site on "terms of service" and I guess we don't even have any - the rules link doesn't really address rights/responsibilities of players connecting to the game, only the consent stuff).

And within the tos, you could say something like: "It is -assumed- that anyone connecting to this game is at least the legal age of consent in their geographical location, whatever that age may be."

That way, the admin is clearly defining their role in responsible parenting of other peoples' children - which is, and should remain, nonexistent. Thing is, a minor child "consenting" to rape scenes is not consenting at all, because a minor child is not legally authorized to consent to anything. So you just put that disclaimer out that of COURSE no parent would allow their minor child to play this game without the parent's consent, and you've just put the responsibility right back on the parents' shoulders where it belongs.

[staggerlee]

I can see the issue of legality, but on an ethical standpoint, any teen who's savvy enough to play a text-based RP intensive game like Arm, is also savvy enough to have found out all about sex, drugs, and rock & roll from the humming terminal in front of them...I'm certainly not gonna be teaching them much new.

This is very much a truth.  In addition, some of our best roleplayers cut their teeth on Armageddon, and our game would be losing a lot of upcoming talent and creative minds if we slapped on a minimum age limit.  Just because you are young does not mean you are immature.  We might lose some players because they encounter things that make them uncomfortable, and that's just fine.  Many young people do understand that if something isn't for them, they should go elsewhere.  We would like to give them the chance to choose instead of arbitrarily telling them that they can't handle it.

And enforcement would be almost impossible.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/i_am_under_18_button

Oh I misrepresented myself as an adult to get into webpages now and then before I was 18, and I played a MUD for the first time long, long, long before I was 18.   It is unenforceable, short of a credit card check which is a bit extreme.

However.

As an adult, potentially pursuing a career that could be damaged by any kind of allegations of that sort, I find it becomes a more complicated question.  I'm surprised at the total lack of concern about it honestly.   Personally I'm extremely pragmatic about these things and share the opinions been posted in these threads, but I've noticed the rest of the world can be a bit less so.  

[brytta.leofa]

And within the tos, you could say something like: "It is -assumed- that anyone connecting to this game is at least the legal age of consent in their geographical location, whatever that age may be."

Honestly, if you're depicting situations in a manner that isn't too self-indulgent, I'm not sure that consent should even be a legal factor.  If you were posting a log of whatever the scenario is, would it need an age disclaimer?

[Shiroi Tsuki]

With a TOS, you don't even have to say that you're 'assuming so and so is the age of consent'.  You just have to say that they need parental permission to play if they aren't.

At that point, it's on the shoulders of whoever the minor is to either get parental permission, or lie about having parental permission, and in either case it isn't any fault of yours.

And who usually reads terms of service, anyway?  No one that I know.  So I don't see that it'd be driving anyone away.

[fourTwenty]

Not no but Hell no. Sorry but anything that would -lower- our player base numbers is a bad idea.

Really, you should be able to tell if your RPing with someone who is immature, it can be kind of obvious. And if it's not obvious then they would seem to be mature enough for this game. Beside, age limits are stupid in all cases. If they are mature enough to find, play, and enjoy this game then I believe they are mature enough to handle the explicit content that comes with it.

That being said, I would have nothing against a TOS stating that graphic(?) violence is to be expected.

Also, it's a text game, most parents I know would just be happy to learn their child is reading.

I think the responsibility is on the parents of the minor, not the game.

This to, this like a motherfucker.

[FantasyWriter]

This is very much a truth.  In addition, some of our best roleplayers cut their teeth on Armageddon, and our game would be losing a lot of upcoming talent and creative minds if we slapped on a minimum age limit.  Just because you are young does not mean you are immature.

This.

Not no but Hell no. Sorry but anything that would -lower- our player base numbers is a bad idea.

This.

I think the responsibility is on the parents of the minor, not the game.

And This.

[Halcyon]

I can see the issue of legality, but on an ethical standpoint, any teen who's savvy enough to play a text-based RP intensive game like Arm, is also savvy enough to have found out all about sex, drugs, and rock & roll from the humming terminal in front of them...I'm certainly not gonna be teaching them much new.

This is very much a truth.  In addition, some of our best roleplayers cut their teeth on Armageddon, and our game would be losing a lot of upcoming talent and creative minds if we slapped on a minimum age limit.  Just because you are young does not mean you are immature.  We might lose some players because they encounter things that make them uncomfortable, and that's just fine.  Many young people do understand that if something isn't for them, they should go elsewhere.  We would like to give them the chance to choose instead of arbitrarily telling them that they can't handle it.

And enforcement would be almost impossible.

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/i_am_under_18_button

Oh I misrepresented myself as an adult to get into webpages now and then before I was 18, and I played a MUD for the first time long, long, long before I was 18.   It is unenforceable, short of a credit card check which is a bit extreme.

However.

As an adult, potentially pursuing a career that could be damaged by any kind of allegations of that sort, I find it becomes a more complicated question.  I'm surprised at the total lack of concern about it honestly.   Personally I'm extremely pragmatic about these things and share the opinions been posted in these threads, but I've noticed the rest of the world can be a bit less so.  

Is this concerned solved by avoiding mudex and torture alltogether?

[Marauder Moe]

I think the OP has a very valid concern.  There are, in fact, laws against disseminating explicit material (read: pornography, which can be graphical or textual) to minors.  I bet most American-based erotic fiction websites have "I agree that I am 18 or older" front pages.

[FantasyWriter]

There is a big difference between pornographic videos/books/game and videos/books/games which contain sexual scenes.

[touringCompl3t3]

I've been considering the current age policies for the game, and find them somewhat troubling.  We allow all ages, though suggest the game has mature content.  I would very much like to see an age requirement of 18+ or as appropriate according to individual states.

The content of the game is at times extremely explicit, and I don't mean only the things we're expected to ask consent for.  I can only imagine the reaction of your average parent that walked in to find their 15 year old mudsexing, torturing, or just being bombarded with the more run of the mill violence and obscenities you encounter in this game. 

I realize that there are a fair number of players that are currently under 18, but that's what's troubling.  It would cover the ass of adults who don't feel comfortable interacting in this manner with minors, or who are in professions such as teaching who could find the kind of accusation that could rise from it to be extremely damaging.

I realize that people could lie about their age, but that's not something I can respond to, and would still serve to cover the ass of the adults playing.

Thoughts?  I'm not making this a poll because I don't believe statistics say much of value.

This post is highly questionable.

[staggerlee]

I've been considering the current age policies for the game, and find them somewhat troubling.  We allow all ages, though suggest the game has mature content.  I would very much like to see an age requirement of 18+ or as appropriate according to individual states.

The content of the game is at times extremely explicit, and I don't mean only the things we're expected to ask consent for.  I can only imagine the reaction of your average parent that walked in to find their 15 year old mudsexing, torturing, or just being bombarded with the more run of the mill violence and obscenities you encounter in this game. 

I realize that there are a fair number of players that are currently under 18, but that's what's troubling.  It would cover the ass of adults who don't feel comfortable interacting in this manner with minors, or who are in professions such as teaching who could find the kind of accusation that could rise from it to be extremely damaging.

I realize that people could lie about their age, but that's not something I can respond to, and would still serve to cover the ass of the adults playing.

Thoughts?  I'm not making this a poll because I don't believe statistics say much of value.

This post is highly questionable.

That's actually a pretty reasonable response.

[Marauder Moe]

There is a big difference between pornographic videos/books/game and videos/books/games which contain sexual scenes.

Legally, I don't think there is. 

Hot coffee, anyone?

[Bogre]

No. Many of the longest term players started when they were many years under 18 (Personally I started at 15). Plus lowering the playerbase is a horrid idea.

[FantasyWriter]

There is a big difference between pornographic videos/books/game and videos/books/games which contain sexual scenes.

Legally, I don't think there is. 

"Pornography" is a layperson's term, with no particular legal significance. Jones may believe that Penthouse is non-pornographic, while Smith believes that it is. Neither is incorrect.

The term of legal significance is "obscenity", which, after struggling for many years and through many cases, the U.S. Supreme Court defined in Miller v. California in 1973. It is a three-part test, as follows:

"The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be:
(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489;
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

[Tisiphone]

"Pornography" is a layperson's term, with no particular legal significance. Jones may believe that Penthouse is non-pornographic, while Smith believes that it is. Neither is incorrect.

The term of legal significance is "obscenity", which, after struggling for many years and through many cases, the U.S. Supreme Court defined in Miller v. California in 1973. It is a three-part test, as follows:

"The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be:
(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489;
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

If you mean to imply that Arm does, in fact, fulfill your third bullet, you're sadly mistaken. There is simply no comparison between Armageddon and, say, anything by William Faulkner.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

By the same token, Armageddon can not compared to Anne Rice's erotic novels, either. It falls neither under erotica nor classic literature, but rather under more of an imagination scripting umbrella, which probably has no legal term. Regardless, it's not Penthouse, by any stretch of the imagination, and calling it literature is a bit cocky, but not so much of a stretch.

[Bilanthri]

"Pornography" is a layperson's term, with no particular legal significance. Jones may believe that Penthouse is non-pornographic, while Smith believes that it is. Neither is incorrect.

The term of legal significance is "obscenity", which, after struggling for many years and through many cases, the U.S. Supreme Court defined in Miller v. California in 1973. It is a three-part test, as follows:

"The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be:
(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489;
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

If you mean to imply that Arm does, in fact, fulfill your third bullet, you're sadly mistaken. There is simply no comparison between Armageddon and, say, anything by William Faulkner.

So you're saying that a conglomeration of fiction, produced as a creative exercise, spanning years and incorporating hundreds of writers, has no artistic or literary value?

[FantasyWriter]

Then here is another:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/pornography

The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are erotic or lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest.

I am pretty sure that neither the original creators of the game nor the current staff 'designed' it this way.

[FantasyWriter]

"Pornography" is a layperson's term, with no particular legal significance. Jones may believe that Penthouse is non-pornographic, while Smith believes that it is. Neither is incorrect.

The term of legal significance is "obscenity", which, after struggling for many years and through many cases, the U.S. Supreme Court defined in Miller v. California in 1973. It is a three-part test, as follows:

"The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be:
(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489;
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."

If you mean to imply that Arm does, in fact, fulfill your third bullet, you're sadly mistaken. There is simply no comparison between Armageddon and, say, anything by William Faulkner.

So you're saying that a conglomeration of fiction, produced as a creative exercise, spanning years and incorporating hundreds of writers, has no artistic or literary value?

QFT

[Tisiphone]

If you mean to imply that Arm does, in fact, fulfill your third bullet, you're sadly mistaken. There is simply no comparison between Armageddon and, say, anything by William Faulkner.

So you're saying that a conglomeration of fiction, produced as a creative exercise, spanning years and incorporating hundreds of writers, has no artistic or literary value?

Personal attachment is not the issue here. I'm relatively sure that a jury would see this collective exercise that we flatter ourselves into thinking is a worthwhile expenditure of time as simply a niche hobby, and a rather disturbing one at that. At the very least, I quite understand why Staggerlee isn't willing to take that risk - or even the risk of the first impression his prospective boss might have, regardless of any hypothetical legal ruling.

My advice: if you're concerned about what a future employer might think about this game, stop playing.

[Bilanthri]

If you mean to imply that Arm does, in fact, fulfill your third bullet, you're sadly mistaken. There is simply no comparison between Armageddon and, say, anything by William Faulkner.

So you're saying that a conglomeration of fiction, produced as a creative exercise, spanning years and incorporating hundreds of writers, has no artistic or literary value?

Personal attachment is not the issue here. I'm relatively sure that a jury would see this collective exercise that we flatter ourselves into thinking is a worthwhile expenditure of time as simply a niche hobby, and a rather disturbing one at that.

I suppose I can see how my comment could be mistaken for ego-stroking; how personal attachment could make me defend my LoveMUD. But think again about what it is we do here. Hours a day spent creating detailed descriptions of fictional accounts. This is not a point-&-click sort of place, where all the pretty pictures are made for you and all you have to do is scum for the new gear.
How many people in our current era are forced to relegate their artistic talents to the "hobby" shelf in order to live a fairly standard NorthAm life? I would love to support myself on nothing more than flowery prose and the love of an audience. Somehow my tip jar never makes rent.
To say that an enormous, and supportive, writing community has no value aside from getting one's gaming "rocks" off, is simply blind.

[Kiri]

As a parent... my thoughts are this. My kids aren't allowed to play Arm. Not yet. I allow them a lot of leeway as far as video games and the like (Hell I let them play Fable among other things) and I let them read what other parents might consider questionable.

To me, the biggest difference that I see with a MUD is that it's not just a video game. It's not just a book. It's -other people- who may or may not realize who they have on the other end of the monitor. It is interactive, which is way more intrusive than a one-sided bit of graphics. Since it is MY responsibility as a parent, and not yours as a player, I simply don't allow them this venue yet.

[Lakota]

I think the responsibility is on the parents of the minor, not the game.

[fourTwenty]

Since it is MY responsibility as a parent, and not yours as a player, I simply don't allow them this venue yet.

I love you so much.

As for the OP's point. You could also get struck by lighting, causing you to stumble backward, reach out to break your fall, happen to grab a crack-pipe, and fall flat on your ass as you forget how to speak English and your future employer walks by. Seriously, the odds of this happening are about even with you being found out to have RP'd naughty things with a minor.

Oh, and from a legal standpoint there is a little something called a curtain of anonymity. I'm not sure exactly how this works as my cousin does not seem to understand the phrase "Laymens Terms". But the long and short of it is, this site clearly holds the opinion that not only are things supposed to be kept IC but for the most part your not even supposed to know who your Rping with, so there is no way you could be legally charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor (which is the only charge I can even think would come close to being applied in this situation) seeing as how you have know way of knowing that person is a minor. You ever notice how on to catch a predator there's always some point in the exchange where she mentions her age? Because even if you met, chatted up, and the went to meet somebody IRL you would be accused of no legal wrongdoing if she had never made any attempt to notify you of her age (providing you immediatly left and called her parents when you noticed she was 14 years younger than you).

[Jingo]

The op has a valid arguement. It really only takes an accusation and a few rumors to ruin a career in education.

Though, I wouldn't want to put an age restriction on this game.

Maybe a disclaimer somewhere on the website so we can cover our asses?

[Iota]

I'm just 17 years old.

[Iota]

SIKE.


I bet I scared you guys for a second there.

[ShaLeah]

I think it's the responsibility of the player.

You're supposed to ask consent anyway so when in that situation just ask if the other person/people are at least 18. Log it. Keep it for safe keeping.   

[Qzzrbl]

Just put something in the ToS about being over eighteen.

Nobody really reads the ToS anyway, especially minors.

And if they -do- happen to read, they'll just be like, "Pfft, whatever." and keep playing, so I really doubt that'll lower our playerbase by any means.

That way, if a parent walks up to see its precious little angel brutally torturing someone to death with a cactus, and flies off the hinges about how immoral and evil and vile we are, we can always throw a, "Hey... Read the Terms of Service. Piss off." at them.

[mansa]

i'm 12 i canot play?

[Riev]

hay guise, if mansa cnat play, i dont wnana play either!

[Gimfalisette]

From Slate: http://www.slate.com/id/2151428/

What do you do with snakes like Foley? Some states pursue them into cyberspace and outlaw dirty messages. Georgia, for instance, forbids any "Internet contact" with minors involving "explicit verbal descriptions or narrative accounts of sexually explicit nudity" or even of "sexual excitement." Actually, the recipient doesn't have to be a minor. He can be anyone "believed ... to be a child residing in this state." You can charge Foley under this law even if he never goes to Georgia or writes to anyone there. All you have to do is meet him in a chat room, pose as an Atlanta teenager, and wait for him to say something gross.

If a pervert won't act on his words, you can criminalize the words. If he won't utter them, you can prosecute him for writing them. If he won't come to your state, you can go get him. If he has no victim, you can invent one. This is no joke. In almost every state, laws specify that you can be convicted of an Internet sex offense against a child even if you contact no child and commit no physical crime. In fact, the most recently analyzed data, published by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, suggest that more people are arrested for using the Internet to solicit cops posing as kids than for using it to initiate relationships with real kids. The unnatural has been surpassed by the artificial.

I do think this issue is worth consideration.

[Rahnevyn]

I'd be interested in getting some demographic data about our playerbase in light of this topic.

I have a hunch that we have, on average, a much older playerbase than most MUDs. I'd also suspect the vast majority of our players are over 18 anyway.

[Gimfalisette]

Previous surveys done on these forums have shown that the average age of the playerbase is about 23, Rahnevyn. But of course that's not very reliable; not everyone uses the forums (IIRC, total responses were somewhere in the 60 to 90 player range, only a portion of the regular playerbase), and a survey through these forums can't capture exact age, just age within a range.

[Gimfalisette]

Looking again, on forum profiles there is an "age" field. Not everyone has this filled in currently, but if you made an official staff push for everyone to (honestly) fill it in, it might be possible to mine that as a dataset after collection from the playerbase.

[brytta.leofa]

The tall, muscular man says, out of character:
  "hi, I'm a 17 year old from georgia."
> draw sword etwo

[manonfire]

The tall, muscular man says, out of character:
  "hi, I'm a 17 year old from georgia."
> draw sword etwo

I'd probably see red, too.

[Gimfalisette]

I'm kind of thinking it might not be a bad idea to raise the minimum age for human PCs to 18, also.

[fourTwenty]

Is this entire thread a joke I'm not getting or do some people seriously worry about this? It is a GAME, the odds of any of that actually happening are well... About the same as the odds of me passing a drug test right now.

How in the hell is someone going to come by the realization that Mr. Bob plays Arm. Bobs PC is Dudeman. Dudeman rapes and tortures Dudette. Dudette is played by Nancy who is 15. Mr. Bob's boss/Nancy's parents/Da Po-Po somehow discover this rape and torture went down and then discover that Mr. Bob plays Dudeman and then discover who Mr. Bob actually is. Anybody who thinks this can actually happen please shoot me an E-mail. I got a great line of upper-midwestern US Hurricane insurance for sale you really need.

I would like to repeat I'm against a -requirement-. Anything that would -lower- our playerbase is a bad idea.

Also, if you stick an 18+ Only sticker on it it's probably gonna send the wrong vibe. We'll attract people interested in Mudsexx instead of RP.

And again, from a legal standpoint if you don't know/reside under the impression that the person is a minor then you cannot be charged with any criminal offenses.

All that said, I see no downside to a TOS which reflects the mature nature of the game.

[Lizzie]

A few bits of info (I posted already but to reiterate):

1. A minor is not legally able to "consent" to anything, including graphic scenes in a text game.
2. Armageddon staff has no way of knowing if the player is a minor or not.
3. Imposing an age minimum is unenforceable, because of #2.
4. A TOS statement like "It is assumed that all players of this game are of the age of consent of their location" or similar is really all that's "necessary." No rule, no condition. Just a statement, placing the responsibility on the player and/or the player's legal guardian.

[mansa]

Isn't this sorta referenced in the Overview and the Quickstart webpages?

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

I'd be interested in getting some demographic data about our playerbase in light of this topic.

I have a hunch that we have, on average, a much older playerbase than most MUDs. I'd also suspect the vast majority of our players are over 18 anyway.

Any survey should also cover what age we were when we started playing. I may be 21 now, but I was a little baby 15-year-old when I first started playing.

[AmandaGreathouse]

I had a short-lived elven Tuluki merchant when I was 18. She wandered around the ruins and died of thirst. I didn't return until I was 21.

[brytta.leofa]

Started when I was 24 or 25.

[Is Friday]

Hey guys I started playing at <certain age>. Just thought I'd let you know.

[Tisiphone]

Hey guys I started playing at <certain age>. Just thought I'd let you know.

Again, most of you aren't paranoid enough.

[brytta.leofa]

Hey guys I started playing at <certain age>. Just thought I'd let you know.

Again, most of you aren't paranoid enough.

How paranoid should we be?

[Zoan]

Fifty paranoid.

[Riev]

I thought one Noid was enough, but we have Fifty Pairs of Noid now?

PEOPLE, PLEASE. THINK OF THE PIZZAS.

[fourTwenty]

Perhaps it is the noid who should aviod me. 

[Riev]

Fuck, guys, we are so witty.

[Dan]

Appropriate Odd Urge for this thread.

I want to make a new Merchant House called En-Bee-See. With a black ops department called, uh, Dateline.

My go-to-guy would be an assassin named Kriss'Hahnson who sneaks into rooms where people are having mud sex and goes OOC to ask ages before sneaking back out.

[AJM]

Appropriate Odd Urge for this thread.

I want to make a new Merchant House called En-Bee-See. With a black ops department called, uh, Dateline.

My go-to-guy would be an assassin named Kriss'Hahnson who sneaks into rooms where people are having mud sex and goes OOC to ask ages before sneaking back out.

I call being Kriss'Hahnson

[triste]

The Original Poster of this thread, like Bebop who started a similar thread, and like many other players who have left, builds a sound argument here.

[Thomoto]

Hahahahah.


To be clear, the intention of this post is the same as the last one by Bebop?

[Lizzie]

The Original Poster of this thread, like Bebop who started a similar thread, and like many other players who have left, builds a sound argument here.

It was already resolved. There is (and has been for around a year IIRC) this blurb in the Consent help file:

Notes:
You must be 18 years of age or older to ask for or give consent for sexual roleplay.

No, it's not enforceable. But it does warn people that if they are NOT 18 or older, then they are knowingly breaking the rules and if their mama catches them and complains, mama will be informed that their 12-year-old daughter needs more supervision if it bothers her.

[Thomoto]

The Original Poster of this thread, like Bebop who started a similar thread, and like many other players who have left, builds a sound argument here.

It was already resolved. There is (and has been for around a year IIRC) this blurb in the Consent help file:

Notes:
You must be 18 years of age or older to ask for or give consent for sexual roleplay.

No, it's not enforceable. But it does warn people that if they are NOT 18 or older, then they are knowingly breaking the rules and if their mama catches them and complains, mama will be informed that their 12-year-old daughter needs more supervision if it bothers her.

I can agree with that. Thank you.

[Good Gortok]

Did you necro a twelve year old thread to basically say "+1"?

Have there been any known cases of minors playing this game in the last decade?

It just seems like such a non-issue. Kids do not play MUDs in our day and age, and on the remote chance that they did, they see way worse on TikTok or whatever.

Christ almighty.

[Alesan]

Have there been any known cases of minors playing this game in the last decade?

Yes.

[Hauwke]

I know I did when I was a minor. Not one anymore, but still.

Also, why was the thread necro'd after 12 years? Seems like it would be easier to simply start a new one at this point.

[Thomoto]

Have there been any known cases of minors playing this game in the last decade?

....Uh, yeah, me.

[Barsook]

I know this was 12 years ago, but I was 17 (three months before my birthday) when I joined back in 2008.

[mansa]

Have there been any known cases of minors playing this game in the last decade?

i'm 12 i canot play?

I'm 24 now.

[Blink]

i'm 12 i canot play?

I'm 24 now.

  I don't believe you. I recall RP'ing with your Kadian merchant back in 2003.  There is no way you were only 7 years old then.   

[Thomoto]

i'm 12 i canot play?

I'm 24 now.

  I don't believe you. I recall RP'ing with your Kadian merchant back in 2003.  There is no way you were only 7 years old then.   

You see, Mansa is a smart man and was a smart child. He started playing when he was two out of his disgust for *toys*, got his third karma at 5, and his 40th karma at ten. He is now one of the vampires from vampire land called staff. And has root access to ginka and the internet. How does this not surprise you? 

[HeeBeeGB]

The Original Poster of this thread, like Bebop who started a similar thread, and like many other players who have left, builds a sound argument here.

It was already resolved. There is (and has been for around a year IIRC) this blurb in the Consent help file:

Notes:
You must be 18 years of age or older to ask for or give consent for sexual roleplay.

No, it's not enforceable. But it does warn people that if they are NOT 18 or older, then they are knowingly breaking the rules and if their mama catches them and complains, mama will be informed that their 12-year-old daughter needs more supervision if it bothers her.

I agree with this. I don't think ArmageddonMUD is the cause for Satanic Panic that it is made out to be. Though I did find the Dateline reference particularly amusing.