Jump to content

How to handle member-guest disagreement over shipping canons?


Anonymous
 Share

Recommended Posts

So most of the time I can figure out the problems I run across as a staffer without any issues. But this one has me pretty stuck and I feel like no matter how I handle it somebody is going to be mad.

 

I run a fandom site and not very long ago, Member A joined with a canon. They stated in both their app and their shipper that they ship a non-canon pairing and would like to see it in play but haven't put up a want ad for it. Member B recently apped the other half of that ship but haven't mentioned that pairing at all in their app. I asked Member A to review the app due to how close their characters are (think Steve Rogers and Bucky Barnes, Sirius Black and Remus Lupin, Katniss Everdeen and Gale Hawthorne, you get the drift). Even for platonic relationships, I like everyone to be on the same page before apps get approved. Member A says Member B did tell them they were apping the second character but there wasn't a lot of communication between them. I suggested that Member A might want to talk with Member B about IC expectations before I accept the app. 

 

A few hours later, Member A told me that Member B told them they won't play out the ship, and Member A is upset at the lack of communication. I checked in with Member B and am told that they will not be playing this ship and don't want to talk about a compromise. Quite frankly, I'm assuming that they either never read Member A's app or read it and decided to ignore it in favour of also ignoring the requested ship. I haven't gotten any other kind of bad vibe off of Member B. They've been chill in the chat and their app is well-written and doesn't have anything in it that goes against canon. Just the fact that they're shutting down any attempts at communication about this ship and figuring out a middle ground. 

 

I don't want to deny the app just because Member B won't play out a ship, but I also don't want to approve an app that's the opposite of what Member A wants. My gut feeling is kind of to side with the member because of the bird in the hand as the saying goes. But telling a guest that they have to go with a ship to be accepted doesn't sit well with me. And I don't really want to deal with drama later down the road if Member B agrees now but refuses to play it out IC. Somebody help me in figuring this out? 

Anonymous poster hash: 7128d...fb2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First: this is the sort of thing that your members should be working out themselves, before hand. Communication between players is so important that I can not use font large enough, bold enough, 90's blink html annoying enough, to stress this. If a player wants to try a ship, they ought to be asking the other player first. You, as an admin, shouldn't be having to do this. Frankly, and full offense to your members but you are their admin. You have SO MUCH to do. You cannot find ships or role play for every one of them. You literally set up an entire website, wrote the rules, gave them plots, made the settings (or wrote them up according to canon) , did the graphics, started some rp and so on and so on. You've given your players every single tool you can to get them to RP with one another, other than grabbing them by the mental heads and saying, "NOW (kiss) RP!" (I don't recommend the latter. ) 

Second: there is absolutely nothing you can do if one player does not wish to role play with another. As an admin, the best you can do is go, "I understand and am sorry it turned out this way." You also shouldn't punish a member by not accepting their app just because another player won't  ship or RP with them. There are a lot of tools forums come with now that roleplayers should be able to use them to ensure their experience at your site is full of what they want to see and read. THAT SAID: the only time you should be stepping into this situation is if the shippy person keeps trying to force the non shippy person into interacting with their character/starts becoming a problem that might turn into or actually become harassment. As I read it, it seems the two of them had their talk, as miscommunication laden as it may have been, came to their decision and that's that. You shouldn't have to do anything else other than decide whether to approve the other app because it's a good app and fits your board, or reject it because its not a good fit / good application.... unless it becomes drama that spills onto the forum itself, you're good. 


 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put yourself in member B's shoes:

 

- You apped a canon character but were denied solely because you wouldn't rp a ship that isn't canon.

 

Would you feel like you've been treated fairly?

  • Preach it! 2

 

sig.png.30b42565d04d922988370bf14e1447bc.png

PSI: an Occult Investigations RP

Roleplay Architects: Grab a friend (or many friends!) and just write.

You can also find me at:

static-historicalrp.jpg  B8CB4x.png rpabutton.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Jones said:

We all have our head canons. They're fun, and getting to play them out is great. But you cannot force someone else to play a ship they don't want to play. If Member A is expecting that then they need to reevaluate how can  games generally work. Even if they apped their character first and mentioned wanting that pairing nobody is obligated to make it happen.  Sure it would have been ideal for Member B to want it too, but they don't and denying a well written app over it would not be fair. If Member A has a snit over it, they're not the type of player most would want around. Member B didn't come in and take a want ad then ignore the desires of the requester. They came in and took the canon they want to play. Let them have it, not fair to punish them when they've done nothing wrong.

 

Member A isn't trying to force anyone to write anything and certainly hasn't had a snit. They're uncomfortable with the fact that there has been no communication beforehand and they've been brushed off whenever they try to talk to Member B about anything about their characters. Since my first post they've told Member B they aren't going to force a ship and are okay with not writing it but they still want to discuss what their characters' interactions have been like in the past. Member B has refused. 

 

22 minutes ago, GreaterRealms said:

First: this is the sort of thing that your members should be working out themselves, before hand. Communication between players is so important that I can not use font large enough, bold enough, 90's blink html annoying enough, to stress this. If a player wants to try a ship, they ought to be asking the other player first. You, as an admin, shouldn't be having to do this. Frankly, and full offense to your members but you are their admin. You have SO MUCH to do. You cannot find ships or role play for every one of them. You literally set up an entire website, wrote the rules, gave them plots, made the settings (or wrote them up according to canon) , did the graphics, started some rp and so on and so on. You've given your players every single tool you can to get them to RP with one another, other than grabbing them by the mental heads and saying, "NOW (kiss) RP!" (I don't recommend the latter. ) 

Second: there is absolutely nothing you can do if one player does not wish to role play with another. As an admin, the best you can do is go, "I understand and am sorry it turned out this way." You also shouldn't punish a member by not accepting their app just because another player won't  ship or RP with them. There are a lot of tools forums come with now that roleplayers should be able to use them to ensure their experience at your site is full of what they want to see and read. THAT SAID: the only time you should be stepping into this situation is if the shippy person keeps trying to force the non shippy person into interacting with their character/starts becoming a problem that might turn into or actually become harassment. As I read it, it seems the two of them had their talk, as miscommunication laden as it may have been, came to their decision and that's that. You shouldn't have to do anything else other than decide whether to approve the other app because it's a good app and fits your board, or reject it because its not a good fit / good application.... unless it becomes drama that spills onto the forum itself, you're good. 

 

The shippy member hasn't tried to force anything on the other. It's the other way around, if anything? Member A has said that they're okay with anything Member B wants to do but wants open lines of communication between them since their characters are so closely tied.  Member B won't speak with them about anything that has to do with their characters. Member A decided to send me screenshots of their conversation and as far as I can tell they have been polite about things but Member B is giving them the cold shoulder. 

 

And there really hasn't been any talking or any decision before this. Member B has said that they're going to write what they want and I support people doing that. But then told Member A to not talk to them about their characters and heavily hinted that they don't care what Member A wants/wanted. Member A is uncomfortable with the way that Member B is treating them and I can't blame them.

 

The other two players with characters connected to Member Bs weren't contacted before the app was put up either even though the app mentions their characters. One said in chat they were surprised to see the app and messaged me asking about it and I checked with the other one. I don't know that I want to accept someone who acts like they don't need to talk to anybody before posting an app and that has nothing to do with any ships. Member B won't talk to anybody about their character and didn't ask players before stating details about their characters in his app. I pended it because they said several things that were wrong. They fixed it but I'm starting to think they're not going to be a good fit because there's been no communication with anyone and no respect to the people whose characters they wrote about in their app. They complained in chat about having to change it. 

Anonymous poster hash: 7128d...fb2

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Anonymous said:

The other two players with characters connected to Member Bs weren't contacted before the app was put up either even though the app mentions their characters. One said in chat they were surprised to see the app and messaged me asking about it and I checked with the other one. I don't know that I want to accept someone who acts like they don't need to talk to anybody before posting an app and that has nothing to do with any ships. Member B won't talk to anybody about their character and didn't ask players before stating details about their characters in his app. I pended it because they said several things that were wrong. They fixed it but I'm starting to think they're not going to be a good fit because there's been no communication with anyone and no respect to the people whose characters they wrote about in their app. They complained in chat about having to change it.

 

So this is not actually a guest disagreement over shipping canons. Member B is an established member with at least two other apps/characters and the problem is they do not communicate. That completely changes the subject of the conversation. If they're not a good fit then they are not a good fit. Say so. You're not even obligated to tell them why. The site is yours, you have a vision for it- including the community it fosters. If you want to be super nice then tell Member B that plotting with existing characters that have a canon association with their characters is an essential part of your community. If they don't enjoy that aspect, politely suggest they move on. 

  • Agree 3

 

operation: bowtruckles & bombs

R6MmD.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Jones said:

 

So this is not actually a guest disagreement over shipping canons. Member B is an established member with at least two other apps/characters and the problem is they do not communicate. That completely changes the subject of the conversation. If they're not a good fit then they are not a good fit. Say so. You're not even obligated to tell them why. The site is yours, you have a vision for it- including the community it fosters. If you want to be super nice then tell Member B that plotting with existing characters that have a canon association with their characters is an essential part of your community. If they don't enjoy that aspect, politely suggest they move on. 

 

Member A is the established member, Member B is the new member/guest. Sorry for the confusion! But yeah that's what the problem's become. It started with Member B refusing to play half a ship (well within their rights) or talk to the player of the other half of the ship (a little iffy imo). But now these other problems have shown up and the shipping part doesn't even matter any more because apparently they think they can write what they want without checking with people? Whatever the case, we're not for them, and fortunately they seem to be on their way without making a scene. 

Anonymous poster hash: 7128d...fb2

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like this has more or less already been resolved. But I'm nosy so I'll give my two cents anyways.

 

Member A has included an IC connection to another character in their application. On my site, this would be considered site canon once their app is accepted. And when Member B applies for the aforementioned character, they must observe the site canon. If they want to include other played characters in their app then they need to check with the Members that play them as well. It's simple communication. Failure to do so shows no only a lack of respect for the already established Members but also your site. If they aren't willing to do a little research and leg work before writing an application, they probably aren't the sort of people I want on my site. Based on what you've said, I would absolutely deny Member B's application.

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Member B is ignoring previous lore and trying to create new ones without contacting players they’re involving. That’s a no from me. I’d request the names removed on the pending atvthe very least and explain to player B they need to contact these people, any people before including them in a bio.

 

that said, it’s up to you as staff to enforce player A’s headcanon if that’s what you want to do, but in the future I’d avoid allowing canons to make such relationship decisions without an existing partner to talk to. You can’t force people to ship.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah after reading through the finer details, if member B is choosing to simply ignore established lore/canon with zero communication, then they don't need to play that canon. Period. For example; We have a canon character on our site who is the uncle of one of my characters. There's an established relationship there (what that is can be determined through rp) But its there. There is no "Oh I just won't ever thread with your character." NOOOOPE. Canons are supposed to be attached to others, they are plot moving characters that are important to the main story. Thus, they have expectations. If you're not willing to even discuss? Yeah, you don't need to take a canon.

  • Agree 2
  • Preach it! 2


The past is a place of reference, not residence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Guidelines and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.