Staffing Making a Comfortable Site

[Uaithne 543]

To what extent do you support administrators making a site to their comfort levels when it means introducing unusual or "silly" rules?

 

Many years ago, there used to be an X-Men site that forbid pretty much everything. I'm not joking. Swearing,  violence, discussions of supernatural (including ghosts), characters who have sex out of wedlock, pretty much any sex at all actually, gay or homosexual characters, etc.

 

This site got a lot of flack for it. For years any time a "ridiculous rule" thread came up on a resource or chat site, you could guarantee that this site's absurd rules would be quoted at least once.

 

And then somebody pointed it out: why did it matter to the rest of us?

 

The admin of the X-Men site was a Jehovah's Witnesses, and all the things that were banned were done so because they were against her religion. If she didn't have that site to play on, where would she play? And at least she wasn't coming onto other people's sites demanding us to cater to her preferences. This was very true, and I'm grateful somebody pointed it out to me. 

 

A little while ago in another thread here on the Initiative, I saw that people came across a site with the "no male players" rule, and I distinctly remember this being a matter of discussion on another site where people found the rule ridiculous, and others jumped into defend the rule because the admin had set up a "safe space" for herself and her members. Now these two examples (Jehovah's Witnesses vs. all-female safe space) occurred years apart and the RP community as a whole changed so much that to compare the reactions people had between them would be like comparing apples to oranges. But it did make me think about what is considered acceptable and what is considered ridiculous.

 

Personally, I don't think that administrators should outright exclude people, though setting limits and expectations is perfectly acceptable, even if I don't agree with them. There's a difference between saying "We don't want to see these behaviors" and "We don't want to see the people who stereotypically may exhibit these behaviors even though we have no proof that any individual person of this stereotyped group has or will exhibit these behaviors."

 

Prohibiting behaviors is understandable. Prohibiting innocent people is ridiculous.

 

Besides, aside from checking IDs, how do you keep people of one gender away from a site? And would you allow biological men who identify as women to join, or are they "too manly" to be a part of the site? Too many technicalities and inefficiencies with those sorts of rules. But I digress.

 

Is it okay to exclude certain types of people to make the staff and desired member base comfortable? (I think it's obvious, but I'll note here that said excluded people are innocent in the sense that they did nothing to deserve an otherwise reasonable ban, such as cheating or bullying.) To what extent is this okay?

[Shades 676]

I'm with you on the "it's okay to exclude behaviors, but not people". 

 

I'm all for the creator of a site having the site they want to play on, though, so I wouldn't be that bothered if the site had a rule that excludes me personally. 

 

Just like other rules might exclude people who don't like them, I try to look at everything with the "the owner has the right to create whatever they want... and I have the right to not join if it doesn't suit me".

 

Which is pretty much my view on everything nowadays.

[Death Kitten 200]

I look at it like free speech: Just because I defend a person's right to say something, doesn't mean I want to hear it; likewise, just because I defend a person having whatever rules they want on their site, I don't need to play there if they don't suit me. I mean, I might wonder what reasoning there is behind it with stuff like you outlined, and even if I don't agree, there are a lot of rules I wouldn't want to be subject to that I can certainly understand why they exist.

[Kit the Human 759]

I feel bad for those poor ladies who got so many shitty dudes in their forum that it was easier to just cut your player base in half and alienate another quarter than deal with them case by case. 

 

That aside, I dont care. If you don't want to hang out with a certain bunch people, than don't.

[VirusZero 176]

I've said before, and I'll repeat here, an admin can have whatever rules they want. It's their site and they can do whatever they want. Does this mean others have to be a part of their site? No, of course not. 

Nor does this mean they get to go out and essentially try to police other sites. (Good luck on that.)

 

As for the banning of men... I don't know how they'd ever pull this off. But if that's what they want then they can go for it. Truthfully there really aren't that many men in roleplay to begin with. I'd say around 10-15% of the roleplayer population is male. You might encounter the odd site with a higher male population (perhaps some Star Trek sites or sites outside the established RP scene like The Initiative) but for the most part they're going to be rare. 

 

[Death Kitten 200]

7 minutes ago, VirusZero said:

As for the banning of men... I don't know how they'd ever pull this off. But if that's what they want then they can go for it. Truthfully there really aren't that many men in roleplay to begin with. I'd say around 10-15% of the roleplayer population is male. You might encounter the odd site with a higher male population (perhaps some Star Trek sites or sites outside the established RP scene like The Initiative) but for the most part they're going to be rare. 

 

If you go RP in the Star Trek fleets, the population is very heavily male. Like, it was a culture shock for me when I ended up here, because I was so used to so many more men in RP than I encounter here.

 

As for being able to effectively police gender of members on a site? Yeah, it'll be hard. I know of at least one person who identifies as male in RL (or at least claimed as much to me) but maintained a female persona that he joined some RP sites with because he felt that women were treated better? So yeah, good luck enforcing a rule like that, for sure.

[Bass 26]

Roleplaying can be really intimate, and I don't just mean in sexual kind of way. How many roleplayers do you know that are afraid to tell people outside of the internet that they roleplay? The answer is more often than not "all of them." With a platform that allows for a limitless number of games, I think it is certainly fair for individuals to make and enforce whatever rules make them comfortable. I am not required to join the site, so it doesn't effect me. I still might make fun of their rules and restrictions in resource areas like this, but if makes them and the people playing with them comfortable, then more power to them.

 

This is going to make me seem like a questionable human but... I have spent most of my rp life as a "female" player. When I started out on neopets, it was my sister's account because they froze mine and my parents weren't about to get involved and explain to some random website on the internet they didn't fully understand that there were two kids in the house. She had a very feminine name, so most people assumed I was a female and I never corrected them. It was easier that way. When I branched out to forums, I got to be me and I didn't like it. People responded differently. It was like a mixed bag of despies, people who seemed scared of me, and then the more occasional normal interactions. A large chunk of my plots either turned toward "romance" or "bromance" and it didn't matter what I wanted. I was also denied wanted ads, but I can't prove that it was because of my gender. It just seemed coincidental when I switched back to "female" and doors started opening again. Now, I'm too old to care anymore. If my being a guy freaks someone out, oh well. That's their problem, not mine. I have found that my gender matters more on city/real-life types of sites than fantasy or science fiction. Although, I think I'm perfect example of why a "no males" rule wouldn't work. No one once ever questioned my female gender. I have been questioned about whether or not I am really a male. That is a whole different issue though.

[StormWolfe 557]

@Bass You'd be welcome on our sites anytime! 

 

I don't care who is behind the keyboard as long as they are 18+, can write reasonably well, and their characters fit into our genre and premise.

 

Personally, I am not a anything goes type person myself. I prefer limited profanity and no graphic sex. I look at these things as not being necessary to tell a good story. Graphic violence depends on the genre and the situation in the story. 

 

Our site's rules range from the silly to the duh! why would you make a rule for that things. We're planning on paring them down even further as some are now archaic and probably unnecessary. 

 

Should Admins make rules and sites that fit into their comfort level - yes! Like I will never allow graphic sex to be written on my site, everyone has the right to set up their writing environment to suit themselves. Everyone else has the right to join or not join.

 

@Uaithne Small world! I actually RP'd on the restrictive site you mentioned - the one run by the Jehovah's Witness. We had some lively discussions because, at the time, I was more overtly Wiccan than I am now. I asked honest questions about her religion and tried to look at things from her point of view and she did the same. There were many things we agreed to disagree on. I didn't like some of her points of view and she didn't like some of mine. We overcame those differences and are still friends to this day. 

 

So, all this rambling comes down to agreeing with most of what's being said. Set up sites and rules that make you comfortable. Join sites you're comfy with and avoid those you are not comfortable with. There's plenty of RPs out there for everyone.

 

Blessed Be,

~ Stormwolfe

[Rune 1,099]

There's nothing stopping any of these people from RPing.

 

There's nothing stopping them from doing 1x1 RP. Or collecting people that believe similar to them and basing a board off of that.

 

There's also nothing wrong with any of it.

 

It's mostly the fact that it's shooting yourself in the foot. Theoretically, everyone wants a "big" board. (Big having different definitions, I don't care if you prefer small boards, that isn't the point.. Big can be big on plot, big on members, big on personality. Just roll with it and hear me out.) We make boards to provide an environment in which WE want to play and hope that we find others that want to play with us. Sites shut down because they don't get members. Sites shut down because people lose interest in their own creation.

 

Having a very niche board is no different than having a board with these very niche rules. Sure, you might find a group that adheres to the same beliefs as you and loves that you've set up your little safe haven... Or you might get mocked relentlessly and not find anyone ever. The same can be said of someone making a board for their very small fandom or what have you. 

 

Basically, if you're going to have your niche rules you should do what the No Men board did and explain WHY that is a rule. Does that mean I'm gonna think it's any less stupid? Nope, but at least you explained it and made it clear WHY you had that established, which makes a massive difference. And if I think its dumb, I'm not your target audience. There's nothing wrong with that, either. I've had people say some of CW's rules are dumb. Aaaand turns out they weren't my target audience. Life goes on.

 

ANYWAY.

 

Should you go to extremes to make your board a place of comfort? If you want to. Is that going to make your board successful? Probably not.

 

But, I'm also of the opinion that lumping everyone into groups is stupid to begin with. I'm a woman, but I've been mistaken for a man, I'm pretty masculine in personality and get mistaken as a guy online more often than not. I'm also, as we've established, very up front and probably not what some people would deem "safe space" material. Does that mean I can't play nice? Not at all. Everyone isn't defined by their basics. Banning that basic is potentially limiting yourself from expanding your own circle, world view and experiences. 

 

TL;DR - You do you, but don't expect it to get you anywhere.

[SoulsRPG 15]

On 'Souls, we're really laid back.  I think it has something to do with the fact that 'Souls is so old (16+ years) that none of the original founders / administrators remain, and administration has cycled throughout the years - this leads to the forum being its own entity that we "take care of" and moderate, but it's not really ours.  We'd never just disband it without consulting our members and other staff, and we don't create rules to make us feel better, simply because at this point, the forum is for all of us - members and staff alike.  We have the basic rules - no harassment, don't be excessively rude, etc. - but we don't make rules excluding people or ways or speaking / writing.  Personally, I think it's better that way; it's a game for everyone.

[Uaithne 543]

I think the main concern I would have with sites that ban entire classes of people is how it looks in the grand scheme of things. One site with "no men" rule isn't going to rock the boat much, and while I chuckle at it, I don't care if such a site exists since it's one site. But I start to think about the greater social aspect of it, and how the roleplay community treats an exclusionary rule that's based not on skill and preference (which in theory can change over time) but on something concrete and personal. Largely, my concern is that it might become socially accepted to make these sorts of "safe spaces" for certain groups of people. I understand that there's a psychological aspect to needing a safe space and I'm not saying that they don't have their place in any way, shape, or form, but I'd hate for this to be another trend that roleplay sites pick up without understanding the ramifications and potential damage it can do not just to the board but to individual people who suddenly feel themselves excluded from cool sites because of how they were born.

 

Can you imagine the uproar if there was a "no women" site, or sites that excluded black people? 

 

I understand that I'm talking in a major "what if" situation, so don't feel like this keeps me up at night, or that I'm lobbying for the complete and utter annihilation of this anti-men site.

 

@Stormwolfe - is she still roleplaying? I can't believe people remember the site . . . So long ago!

 

@Bass, on a similar vein, I don't assign myself a gender on roleplay sites because of the same sort of crap you described. I've been both male and female (sometimes assumed by others and sometimes outright stated, though less of the latter) and I've had some pretty nasty experiences. People flirt with me and then throw shit fits when I tell them that I'm not the gender they seek, or in other situations, I find myself in un-agreed upon battle for supremacy or something. I guess because I'm pretty blunt and don't take hints well, people of the same gender as what I have stated will see me as competition, despite my complete naivety. Doesn't matter if the other people are male or female - the behavior is still exhibited. However, things became so much nicer and less dramatic when I started to "decline to state" my gender.

 

But since I've had these experiences, I can tell you with 100% confidence that both men and women act ridiculous in very similar manners. It does surprise me that you had women ignoring you because you're male. When I'm male, I have women all over me. Then again, this was years ago, and times change.

 

I've rambled again.

[ArthurGael 14]

I don't have much to add to the topic other than saying I agree with everyone who said that people have the right to add whatever rules they want to and, if you are bothered by them, you can just not join it.

 

In a side note, though: 

 

The roleplaying community is extensive. There are people from different places and belonging to different generations. People who have different religions and cultures.

 

Growing up as a Brazilian, I will never understand what's the deal people from the US have with cursing or saying the word "god" or whatever. Or why they call themselves America while there are so many other American countries. While my friends from other countries sometimes find absurd the fact that we Brazilians often go to college in the cities/towns where we grew up and keep living with our parents while we are studying, and how people have no problem with hugging when they are introduced to someone. 

 

I'm saying this because I think it's too easy to label a rule as "dumb" without taking into consideration the reason why the person made it in the first place. Okay... maybe they didn't explicitly said why they wrote down that rule but that makes you entitled to label it? Just because you don't understand something, it doesn't make it dumb. It's like labeling students bad because they are restless and overall difficult... you might as well discover later on that they have ADHD.

 

The point is: you don't have to understand something to respect it. People shouldn't have to explain why to receive respect.

Edited December 28, 2017 by ArthurGael

[StormWolfe 557]

51 minutes ago, Uaithne said:

think the main concern I would have with sites that ban entire classes of people is how it looks in the grand scheme of things. One site with "no men" rule isn't going to rock the boat much, and while I chuckle at it, I don't care if such a site exists since it's one site. But I start to think about the greater social aspect of it, and how the roleplay community treats an exclusionary rule that's based not on skill and preference (which in theory can change over time) but on something concrete and personal. Largely, my concern is that it might become socially accepted to make these sorts of "safe spaces" for certain groups of people. I understand that there's a psychological aspect to needing a safe space and I'm not saying that they don't have their place in any way, shape, or form, but I'd hate for this to be another trend that roleplay sites pick up without understanding the ramifications and potential damage it can do not just to the board but to individual people who suddenly feel themselves excluded from cool sites because of how they were born.

 

Oh, personally, it is not something I would do. I don't care who is behind the keyboard as long as they follow our rules, treat everyone respectfully, and don't disrupt the game itself. In fact, who they are in real life is none of my business. But, if that is someone else's comfort zone, it's their business, not mine.

 

@Uaithne No, she no longer roleplays. She is now married with a family of her own. And, it seems to me, she's also broadened her point of view. 

[Elena 546]

1 hour ago, ArthurGael said:

Growing up as a Brazilian, I will never understand what's the deal people from the US have with cursing or saying the word "god" or whatever. Or why they call themselves America while there are so many other American countries. While my friends from other countries sometimes find absurd the fact that we Brazilians often go to college in the cities/towns where we grew up and keep living with our parents while we are studying, and how people have no problem with hugging when they are introduced to someone. 

 

So are we. Usually the youngest child lives with the parents until the parents die and they inherit the house. (Or so was in the past, now less since many people are emigrating). I lived with my mother until 34 when I got married, and she got angry with me that then I got to live with my husband and his mother.  It is usually very convenient for couples having children. Nannies are less common when grandmas are available!

 

Back to topic, I have a couple of less seen rules too, because this is how I like to write my stories, be they interactive. I am trying to minimize the impact of flaking, because I am focused on continuing and finishing the story with all the available writers. For me, the whole interactive story is the experience. The immersion in another historical period's adventures. I don't ask from others anything I am not ready to give wholeheartedly at my turn.

Edited December 28, 2017 by Elena

[Kit the Human 759]

@Uaithne if exclusionary forums become a big thing than we have a bigger problem on our hands don't we? Because if an admin goes out to make a safe space, that means they don't feel safe in the rest if the community. Wouldn't you be concerned about the state of the RP community if large groups of people felt unsafe in it? 

 

If we all just try and be decent and compassionate people, other people are less likely to feel the need to create safe spaces. 

 

What I don't understand about this discussion is the focus on the result, not the cause, (or the proposed solution, not the problem) as if there's some implicit belief that exclusionary rules are done just cus. 

 

Why not focus on the kind of behaviour that drives people to outright ban an entire group of people from your forum? Or in other words, focus on the problem that this proposed solution seeks to solve?