18+? Age requirements.

[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.