[MUD-Dev] Administrative Responsibilities

[Jon A. Lambert]

On  1 Feb 98 at 6:22, Greg Munt wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Feb 1998, Jon A. Lambert wrote:
> 
> > The most satisfying and moral solution to this problem is to not allow 
> > "victims" on the mud.  
> 
> > A good administrator should take a proactive role in 
> > banishing "victims" from the mud for their own protection.  
> 
> With the greatest respect, I find this to be a load of bollocks. I 
> inadvertedly offended one person. About 5 of their friends sought to 
> 'protect' them from me. "...[we are] spanking an impudent child..." was the 
> phrase used by them to describe their actions.

With some variation, this is an altogether normal response, especially 
from those living in an anarchic society.  Where strong social controls
are not in place, tribal bonds become the focal point for execution 
of mud "justice".  It's a fascinating dynamic at work.  I have been 
deliberately on both sides of this tribal structure, as an insider 
and outsider.  Even on the same mud. :)  There are consequences to
actions, even innocent ones in such societies.  Offending a tribal 
chief on a anarchic PK mud can be a terrifying and adrenaline-charged 
experience.  

I'm not a proponent of anarchy either in RL nor on my mud.  However I do 
understand the social interactions required of one in such a system.

There is an interesting question here.  Why are so many muds like this?
Why do healthy and otherwise boring people in RL enjoy playing tin-pot
dictators, tyrants and generally offensive characters on many muds?
I think it is fairly simple really.  Muds are often an extension of our 
darker side.  The anonymity offered provides a cover to explore these 
areas.  It's no accident that high heroic and villianous fantasy and 
violence are the primary fodder of muds.  I would find it highly amusing 
to discover that the very polite and quiet accountant sitting next to 
me on the subway could be none other than Thundarr the foul-mouthed and 
insulting juvenile barbarian that repeatedly killed me and otherwise had 
my number the night before.    

And there is a counter question.  Why, if muds are about fantasy and
alien worlds, due users and administrators seek to impose a morality
and social conventions on the game world which parallels real world 
constructs and which may run counter to the mud's theme?

> The administrator, not wanting to be bothered by dealing with social 
> problems, stated that they would do nothing about it.

You are describing a particular style of game here.  Much akin to
someone running a Quake server.  Certainly adminstration interference
in such a game is undesired by its fans.  The problem here is that
these philosophies are not often made clear by an administrator.  Likely 
it's a result of little experience with different styles of muds.  The
administrator may believe these things to be self-evident.  

> What you are suggesting, is that in addition to the so-called victim 
> suffering from harassment and victimisation, they must be banned from a 
> mud from which they have procured many months (typically) of 
> entertainment? A ban would:
> 
>   1. Legitimise harassment.

How so?  Clearly, if a mud has chosen to define the parameters of
activities that are considered acceptable or non-acceptable then
they have defined harassment, not legitimized it.  Sadly many muds
don't attempt to define it.  Simply saying "harassment is not
tolerated" is not a definitive statement of any merit or weight.

>   2. Legitimise victimisation.

On the contrary, I cannot think of any better way to de-legitimize
victimization.  Banning victims is a strong statement against this.

>   3. Remove a (potentially great) source of entertainment from the victim.

The key word here is "potentially".  The victim's source of entertainment
has become a source of pain.  The victim has made a significant decision
in regards to their perception of the mud world that they cannot attain 
that potential.  Yes, most victims do choose to remain in the environments 
that cause them the greatest discomfort.  That does not alter the fact that 
it is NOT in their best interest to remain in such an environment.

>   4. Cut off the victim from many of their friends that are regular users 
>      of the mud.

Not so.  I believe I mentioned referring the victim to another mud.
Certainly their friends would choose to follow them and aid in their
recovery.  Good friends would, wouldn't they? 
 
>   5. Make the aggressors feel justified in their actions.

If such rules are notably absent, then they are certainly justified in
their actions.  How could they not be?  OTOH, if rules of conduct and 
punishment are present, they are definately subject to them.  Certainly you 
are not advocating victimizing aggressors for rules of conduct which are 
not present or downright alien to a particular mud environment?  

>   6. Make the victim feel as if *they* were in the wrong.

Certainly a commonly held belief by victims.  I find it quite distasteful 
to be charged with the responsibilty of determining whether these feelings 
are justified or not.    

>   7. Add to the already large volumes of emotional trauma being suffered 
>      by the victim.

Removing them, removes the trauma immediately and effectively.  I daresay
one would be stepping over lines of ethical conduct, should one wish to
engage in pop psychology with users of your system.  

>   8. Turn a bad experience into hatred, a need for vengeance, even a 
>      desire for murder in real life. The administrator should help deal 
>      with the problem, rather than make it even worse. 

OTOH, by not coddling the victim, an administrator forces them to become 
proactive.  Victims ALWAYS want someone else to deal with and acknowledge 
their problems.  Victimhood is a self-destructive phenomenon.  It's a 
poor understanding of cause and effect.  The victim seeks to connect
effects they create directly with causes that others create.  It is 
an unhealthy belief that the victim is a mindless being with no self-will
or morality of their own.  IMNSHO, religious instruction can be very 
helpful for these individuals.  The scope of which is outside the
boundaries of my mud world.

>      Thought: perhaps 
>      my violent dislike for stock muds can be blamed on the fact that these 
>      experiences were first gained on a stock mud that I administrated. 
>      Maybe.

I would be hard pressed to make any quantifiable comparisons between human 
behavior and codebase.  For example, check out Mirkwood (see Mud Connector 
for addie).  It's a typical stock ROM with a good size player base that's
quite friendly to the feelings and happiness of its players.  Suprisingly 
several forms of controlled PK exist in this environment.  

> Sometimes the need for vengeance can lead to good things - it led me to 
> write my first scratch mud, for example. But sometimes, it cannot.
> 
> > Remove the 
> > victim from the environment and provide them with the URL of a good support 
> > mud.  That way they can share their feelings and recover with others who 
> > have suffered similar abusive treatment.  It's sad that many administrators 
> > have so little understanding in this area.  Many allow the victim to login 
> > and continue to play thus delaying and crippling their recovery. 
> 
> This is the easy way out. The easy way is frequently not the best.
> 
> I consider punishing the victim to be an immoral act. I cannot see how 
> banning them is in any way 'the most satisfying and moral solution'. If 
> anyone should be banned, it is the agressors.
>

The real punishment is to allow them to stay.  There are dozens of muds
out there where one can find "happiness".  An understanding administrator 
will be quick to point out alternative avenues that would be more 
entertaining for a given player.  What you are really talking about here is 
a "commonly held standard of rules, conduct, responsibility or government". 
I don't think a one-size fits all approach is at all appropriate.  
AnarchyMUD and CarebearMUD each have there own audience and function.

--
--/*\ Jon A. Lambert - TychoMUD     Internet:jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com /*\--
--/*\ Mud Server Developer's Page <http://www.netcom.com/~jlsysinc> /*\--
--/*\   "Everything that deceives may be said to enchant" - Plato   /*\--