Feedback on playing and log-ins

[Reiloth]

Modern roleplaying structures are more transparent and don't allow for abuses to be done in private as they are here. I think that is the greatest concern of anyone returning who has been wronged in the past.

One of the things I have noticed recently, and I hope it will become policy, is that staff have started replying to my wishes with a signature.   I greatly enjoy this change, and wish it was encoded somehow in the game, rather than manually done by the staff.  I feel it helps to be more transparent with the communication to the players.

Example:
>wish all I seem to be stuck in my apartment after the game crashed, and I do not have my key.  Can someone please let me out?  Thansk!

>

>

Someone sends:
   "Unlocked!  You're free! - shabago"

Not to beat a drum here but... if Shabago were visible, you'd just get 'Shabago sends', and there would be no need to add a signature. Literally the only reason you can't see who is sending these is because of the policy of logging in as wizinvis by default.

There are different levels of invisibility that Staff can set — if they are visible enough to appear when responding to wishes, they would also be visible in a room, and as Staff often multi task and respond to wishes while doing something else, it's typically better to set your invis level so you won't appear to PCs when you poofin or poofout than be visible when responding to wishes.

That being said maybe it can be coded so the invisibility level doesn't affect wish sends, unless it is more purposefully set that way.

[wizturbo]

So long, and thanks for all the stories. Delirium out.

I'll miss you.  One of my favorite players of all time.  I hope whatever brought you to this decision changes with time and you return, would love to play with you again sometime (whenever I get a chance to return myself...)

[CirclelessBard]

Frankly, all staff communication being signed in some way is a bare minimum when it comes to transparency.

The fact that whenever transparency from staff comes up, the concern is redirected to player privacy, is admittedly discouraging. It is possible to be transparent about rulings, about internal discipline directed at staff for abuses, etc., without violating player privacy. The fact that this happens in modern roleplaying games is proof of this, and Is Friday is absolutely right that newer games have this figured out.

I'm not really sure what to say that hasn't already been said. Several players have said they have left the game due to outright abuse by staff, both in this thread and and in outside places. Logic follows that, to retain players, staff need to be more aggressive about preventing further abuse from happening. I would like a straight answer from a Producer on what they want to do to prevent staff abuses going forward.

[Dar]

Not to detract from the concept of 'abuse by staff'.  I would love seeing a clearer definition of this.  Riev began saying he had an staff alt disable crime code, only to later reduce it to some elves drawing blades. Then proceeded to talk about how Nessalin uninvised to ban people who wished him.

We definitely should address the staff abuses.  But we should be able to see whats real and whats fiction.

[kahuna]

Not to detract from the concept of 'abuse by staff'.  I would love seeing a clearer definition of this.  Riev began saying he had an staff alt disable crime code, only to later reduce it to some elves drawing blades. Then proceeded to talk about how Nessalin uninvised to ban people who wished him.

We definitely should address the staff abuses.  But we should be able to see whats real and whats fiction.

Well that's the problem. If you refuse to address problems publicly and only privately it's very convenient for you as the senior in the senior/subordinate relationship. People will tell their stories elsewhere. Those stories will be read but no response, (this was stated as staff policy here due to privacy concerns). This to me is a bad policy but that's just me. No other game does it this way anywhere afaik, if someone can give me an example I'd love to see one. Every other game I've ever played if you have a public complaint it is usually resolved publicly. It's vexing. I'm terribly vexed.

[Dar]

Well.  I used to be a regional manager in a company that was big enough to have HR department and I now own my own company.  Always, always, ALWAYS conflicts were resolved privately.

In a big company it would be HR being the buffer.  They heard all parties out, gathered all the information. Then helped both me ane the employee to reach a resolution. Occasionally, I didnt even know who was the employee in question. HR did not answer to me and if we failed to reach a resolution was ment to go over my head.

Now that I own my company, we are too small for HR. I handle such issues personally, but still always privately.  The key there is that there is rarely emotion on my end.  Its a balance between morality, reputation, effectiveness, and profit.

[kahuna]

I said game not company. Also Arm is not a fortune 500 company. It's a free text based game online in a niche genre that has maybe 10k players to advertise to. I've never seen a game not utilize public criticism as a way to make the game better. Game designers should want people complaining about the game, that's the only way you're going to make it better. Once people stop complaining you're in trouble because nobody is playing the game anymore.

[CirclelessBard]

Not to detract from the concept of 'abuse by staff'.  I would love seeing a clearer definition of this.  Riev began saying he had an staff alt disable crime code, only to later reduce it to some elves drawing blades. Then proceeded to talk about how Nessalin uninvised to ban people who wished him.

We definitely should address the staff abuses.  But we should be able to see whats real and whats fiction.

Here are some examples in this thread of what I mean by abuse by staff. They got lost in the discussion about karma timers, decaying items, and the situation surrounding Halaster/Delirium.

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1081422.html#msg1081422
"That followed some pretty awful things that happened to a previous character in game and instead of having certain general questions answered I was basically given some rather nasty replies. "

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1081497.html#msg1081497
"A questionable, previously-warned player is allowed a special role as the leader of a large organization. Borderline sexually abuses newbies to the game, makes me want to store multiple times, makes terrible decisions compounded by lack of OOC communication staff-side, completely ruins my enjoyment. Later I found out that this person made many people store through other iterations, from this borderline behavior, had been warned before, and that I probably should have reported it every time. You can fix this by not letting known sex pests play your game at all, let alone take the reins."

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1081881.html#msg1081881
"Because even if we work hard in game for 6 months, you don't give us respect or consideration. "

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1082080.html#msg1082080
"As I get older, it becomes harder to dedicate time to a game where I am unable to share my experiences, good or bad, without fear of being negatively affected by a faceless organization that controls how much fun and support I get IN that game."

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1082169.html#msg1082169
" I still think about my noble being murdered, for refusing to have sex with the NPC. Staff married her to him as a punishment for not wanting to participate in a plot."

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1082177.html#msg1082177
" there is absolutely no urge to dip myself or my headspace into a -game- environment that feels like it could give two shits less for all the hours I've played, items and docs I've submitted, leaders I've tried to get thru staff rotations, festivals I've put hours into to make story for others or attempts I've made to help others figure it out."

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1082191.html#msg1082191
"I could be wrong on a few details but however it went, staff response wasn't helpful what so ever. I was literally surrounded by trees, the code wasn't working, and I was being treated like a dumb ass."

https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,58471.msg1082262.html#msg1082262
" People aren't just stepping away because game make me mad.  Some people have felt harassed, abused and sexually uncomfortable. These things have been issues for years and I know I personally have never felt they have been approached with the seriousness they deserve and I can't keep going there with it because it's super triggering to be dismissed, minimalized and not believed. ... These are serious matters and they hurt trust as the years tick by and there are zero visible repercussions or significant changes to staff culture."

There is a lot to address in these posts, and to be frank they have been barely responded to or touched. I assume it's because these are sensitive issues (to varying degrees obviously) and staff want to take their time to craft a reply. And I can be patient. But I would really like to see something.

[Furious George]

Just pointing out that the two busy threads include sentiments like:

."I don't always feel like I'm playing in a safe gaming environment"

AND

"I really wish there were more ways to subdue, hinder, abuse PCs, maybe even presenting it as a mobile locked room for pkill."

[dumbstruck]

Wanting to introduce an IC command != wanting less accountability/transparency in a situation where a very real power imbalance (often only exacerbated by the veneer of anonymity because you don't even truly know who is behind these actions when they are happening in game versus in the request tool - you can guess, but you can't be certain) is causing problems for some people? I mean, I get what you are saying, but I don't feel like these are the same things. For one, much of the feedback in this thread deals directly with staff and in the other thread it is directly an IC command which at least theoretically would be player/player.

[Furious George]

Wanting to introduce an IC command != wanting less accountability/transparency in a situation where a very real power imbalance (often only exacerbated by the veneer of anonymity because you don't even truly know who is behind these actions when they are happening in game versus in the request tool - you can guess, but you can't be certain) is causing problems for some people? I mean, I get what you are saying, but I don't feel like these are the same things. For one, much of the feedback in this thread deals directly with staff and in the other thread it is directly an IC command which at least theoretically would be player/player.

As someone who once reported a commoner being locked in a PC nobles room being told I was good breeding material, along with the atmosphere, I was told by staff that the only foul play was my describing the situation as feeling like a rape threat.  Sure, I buy that, I used the R word ic once....
But staff 100% turned a blind eye to it and laid the scolding on me.

I don't really have a lot of hope for hogties, snares and bindings bringing entirely positive to to the table, with or without staff oversight and rules.

Players will find ways to make anything shady on a long enough timeline.


Edited to add:
I'm not a fan of closed door pkill especially after my last one where two people of influence went in, the higher ranked one came out.  And in my attempt to get staff aware I was cursed at by a producer.  So, it's a thing.

Before it gets moderated, I'm happy to give staff links to both of these issues should they wish to revisit either of those instances with more than a closed request.

[Iiyola]

Wanting to introduce an IC command != wanting less accountability/transparency in a situation where a very real power imbalance (often only exacerbated by the veneer of anonymity because you don't even truly know who is behind these actions when they are happening in game versus in the request tool - you can guess, but you can't be certain) is causing problems for some people? I mean, I get what you are saying, but I don't feel like these are the same things. For one, much of the feedback in this thread deals directly with staff and in the other thread it is directly an IC command which at least theoretically would be player/player.

As someone who once reported a commoner being locked in a PC nobles room being told I was good breeding material, along with the atmosphere, I was told by staff that the only foul play was my describing the situation as feeling like a rape threat.  Sure, I buy that, I used the R word ic once....
But staff 100% turned a blind eye to it and laid the scolding on me.

I don't really have a lot of hope for hogties, snares and bindings bringing entirely positive to to the table, with or without staff oversight and rules.

Players will find ways to make anything shady on a long enough timeline.

It didn't even remotely cross my mind that it could be used for those purposes. And I don't believe it will, if there is an explicit warning that this skill should not be used for any sexual content.

But if confidence in staff is so low that you think that this potential skill will mostly be allowed to be used for this very purpose... then I don't know what to say... I genuinely wonder why people will still play, then.

Maybe I'm just ignorant.

[Furious George]

I'm against anything that hinders cooperate storytelling.

[Iiyola]

I'm against anything that hinders cooperate storytelling.

And that's what I had in mind with that request. Insta-kill will certainly not cooperate storytelling.

But we digress. Best to discuss this in the other thread?

[Is Friday]

As someone who once reported a commoner being locked in a PC nobles room being told I was good breeding material, along with the atmosphere, I was told by staff that the only foul play was my describing the situation as feeling like a rape threat.  Sure, I buy that, I used the R word ic once....
But staff 100% turned a blind eye to it and laid the scolding on me.

When I was playing my Atrium leader I was very interested in driving plots that had a lot of creativity, subterfuge, and other exciting elements. I succeeded in creating a money laundering scheme via paintings. Nobles were bidding on my PC's paintings and sculptures - my PC had their plans turned into the largest public display in Allanak. (My PC is uncredited ICly, but yes the Oashi monument was Ellenoire's design. You'll also find a sculpture of Verenestra in the Oashi estate, and another sculpture in the Borsail estate.)

But what was the biggest plot for that PC? It wasn't that. It was the fact that a Templar had attempted to f**k my PC and she rejected him. That turned into me involving staff and then staff addressing said player, who followed up with a Way convo that had the words "I understand how I made you feel uncomfortable". This was in no uncertain terms that staff had simply slapped a wrist and the player decided to continue the plot of dominating my PC.

It became a murder plot as they attempted to assert their authority over my PC as a Templar, threatening to execute her. Then following through and attempting - only to be stopped by nobles (and their noble guards) in the Dome of all places. The Templar was later executed by a higher ranked ally of my PC.

I have played a few nobles, tons of leaders in most clans - and there is really nothing to address the ambiguous and often predatory nature of consent rules as they currently stand. You have no recourse as a player if you do not wish to play into these sex plots. You just don't. You die if you resist. My Atrium PC was the most politically powerful commoner in the city, perhaps ever, and it was astounding that she came out on top. But there's half a dozen examples from my own personal experience where this was not the case.

Consent is handled very poorly in this game because if you reject someone of a higher social status they can very easily punish you.

[Brytta Léofa]

Can we mostly agree on the principle of: "Don't use sex as a weapon, even a political one (it's not the noughties anymore)?"

I started to type out ideas for enforcing this, but I'm not sure we actually have broad agreement here. The no-rape policy takes some pains to not go that far.

[Brytta Léofa]

I'm interested in the idea of publicly linking PCs to forum accounts. We let folks do this in a limited way already, with (1) clan boards and (2) public event announcements (can anybody guess who Kestria plays? don't answer that).

Would there be a benefit in transparency and bonhomie? Would it increase OOC collusion?

[Bebop]

As someone who once reported a commoner being locked in a PC nobles room being told I was good breeding material, along with the atmosphere, I was told by staff that the only foul play was my describing the situation as feeling like a rape threat.  Sure, I buy that, I used the R word ic once....
But staff 100% turned a blind eye to it and laid the scolding on me.

When I was playing my Atrium leader I was very interested in driving plots that had a lot of creativity, subterfuge, and other exciting elements. I succeeded in creating a money laundering scheme via paintings. Nobles were bidding on my PC's paintings and sculptures - my PC had their plans turned into the largest public display in Allanak. (My PC is uncredited ICly, but yes the Oashi monument was Ellenoire's design. You'll also find a sculpture of Verenestra in the Oashi estate, and another sculpture in the Borsail estate.)

But what was the biggest plot for that PC? It wasn't that. It was the fact that a Templar had attempted to f**k my PC and she rejected him. That turned into me involving staff and then staff addressing said player, who followed up with a Way convo that had the words "I understand how I made you feel uncomfortable". This was in no uncertain terms that staff had simply slapped a wrist and the player decided to continue the plot of dominating my PC.

It became a murder plot as they attempted to assert their authority over my PC as a Templar, threatening to execute her. Then following through and attempting - only to be stopped by nobles (and their noble guards) in the Dome of all places. The Templar was later executed by a higher ranked ally of my PC.

I have played a few nobles, tons of leaders in most clans - and there is really nothing to address the ambiguous and often predatory nature of consent rules as they currently stand. You have no recourse as a player if you do not wish to play into these sex plots. You just don't. You die if you resist. My Atrium PC was the most politically powerful commoner in the city, perhaps ever, and it was astounding that she came out on top. But there's half a dozen examples from my own personal experience where this was not the case.

Consent is handled very poorly in this game because if you reject someone of a higher social status they can very easily punish you.

This is part of the reason I believe Armageddon should absolutely be eighteen plus because we're are grown adults in our thirties struggling with some of the IC and OOC sexual interactions.  A sixteen or seventeen year old should not be navigating in or anywhere near these waters under any circumstances.

I find anyone advocating to play this game of sex, drugs, murder and betrayal with high school kids to be alarming.

[Kismetic]

I find anyone advocating to play this game of sex, drugs, murder and betrayal with high school kids to be alarming.

Preach.

[Is Friday]

I think it's also important to mention that I have been on every side of the conflict that has caused players harm from overly grotesque plots. I've played the slave, the noble, the murderer, the victim, the abused, the abuser, and everything in between. Often times these "adult" themed plots were pushed by staff, which would illicit a kind of approval to a naïve, immature or uneducated mind. Surely, this is okay? Staff-run NPCs are telling my PC to do something. When you're young - you really don't know better.

With something so immersive and addictive as ArmMUD that's really dangerous for peoples' health. Especially when any form of after-care is actively discouraged and you are banned for talking through events. You're left isolated, angry, alone, and without recourse when you've been wronged. Often when you've wronged others you're left in the dark about it - so you continue abusive behavior to others.

[dumbstruck]

I'm interested in the idea of publicly linking PCs to forum accounts. We let folks do this in a limited way already, with (1) clan boards and (2) public event announcements (can anybody guess who Kestria plays? don't answer that).

Would there be a benefit in transparency and bonhomie? Would it increase OOC collusion?

I like the idea a lot. I think possibly the biggest argument against it other than that at least some people may wish to retain anonymity (which I don't mind if you don't want yourself known, don't make yourself known) might be that it might reveal when your character is dead, or stored in the sense that however it is linked, the name? (picture? whatever?) might be updated before it is commonly known, and while again I don't think that is something that should be taken IC (literally just give it 2-3 IC weeks, oftentimes that's all it takes for a pc who is around all the time to be missing before you can reasonably conclude they are dead), I get how some people might be tempted to metagame that, and how that might cause problems in some way shape or form down the road. That said? When you are trying to coordinate between multiple sponsored roles without endless OOCs for something like a festival and you aren't necessarily on all at the same time, or even sponsored and nonsponsored roles (Arabet, for example, as one clan that recently had an auction at an IC event that was no doubt done by a nonsponsored role), it would definitely make it easier to get in touch with one another without endless Way tag and hurry up and wait, if you can just set up times to try and be about for meetings if you aren't usually on at the same times, etc.

[valeria]

The no-rape policy takes some pains to not go that far.

Not only does it take pains not to go that far, it was brought up at the time that people might be pressured by higher ranking PCs, and was actively rejected as a circumstance the policy was designed to cover. I'm not as good at search strings on my phone while standing by the only window at work where I get two bars of reception, but I'm sure someone can find that discourse. The current helpfile is extremely outdated in terms of modern concepts of consent.

[Riev]

I believe it boiled down to "Rape by Authority" or coercive was too nebulous to directly police. Such as, say, your Aide is locked in a room with the Templar you serve, and its heavily implied that you cannot leave alive unless you perform a sexual act.

It was not brutal. It was not bloody. It was not emoted as 'forced', but the implication is "Do it or you can never leave".

I'm not saying staff advocate this kind of plot specifically, and we all know in a gritty environment that abuse of power exists, but on a PERSONAL level? Anyone who takes the sexual roleplay of the game to that level is not someone I'm comfortable playing with, whether they be a Templar or an indie dune trader.

[Reiloth]

It's really, really not that hard to play people in authority positions who NEVER use their authority to coerce sex. Like...It's a choice. It's a choice to make your PC that way. This excuse of 'Well it's what the character would do' is BS.

Those that do, or think it's a neat plot device, or think 'that's what my character would do' likely should not be allowed near roles of authority (Templar, GMH Family, Noble). Period.

If someone files a player complaint about an authority figure PC doing that, shows logs, and says it makes them uncomfortable, that authority PC should be brought upstairs, told why that is not cool, and then stored. I've seen a few examples of the 'wrist slap' of offending templars and nobles and it's not only insulting, it's contributing to a culture of protection of predatory behavior.

It's hard enough to play a Templar, or a Noble. Why make your life even weirder and harder by pursuing these plots and style of RP? Murder, Corruption, and Betrayal can all be achieved while leaving coercing sexual relationships from people in lower political standing from you out of the picture entirely.

[Bebop]

It's really, really not that hard to play people in authority positions who NEVER use their authority to coerce sex. Like...It's a choice. It's a choice to make your PC that way. This excuse of 'Well it's what the character would do' is BS.

Those that do, or think it's a neat plot device, or think 'that's what my character would do' likely should not be allowed near roles of authority (Templar, GMH Family, Noble). Period.

If someone files a player complaint about an authority figure PC doing that, shows logs, and says it makes them uncomfortable, that authority PC should be brought upstairs, told why that is not cool, and then stored. I've seen a few examples of the 'wrist slap' of offending templars and nobles and it's not only insulting, it's contributing to a culture of protection of predatory behavior.

It's hard enough to play a Templar, or a Noble. Why make your life even weirder and harder by pursuing these plots and style of RP? Murder, Corruption, and Betrayal can all be achieved while leaving coercing sexual relationships from people in lower political standing from you out of the picture entirely.

Can vouch that what Reiloth says is true and they excel at it.  It's really not that hard.