[MUD-Dev] Re: WIRED: Kilers have more fun

[Travis S. Casey]

On 21 July 1998, Marian Griffith wrote:
> On Fri 10 Jul, Jon A. Lambert wrote:

>> I'm questioning the direct linkage between real violence and mud 
>> violence.  How can one voluntarily and willingly participate in a 
>> game where violence is possible, while maintaining that there is 
>> such a link? 

>> I would maintain that willing participation in such a 
>> environment is tantamount to endorsing the position that violence 
>> does not occur in muds

> Violence does not equate physical violence. It is the exertion of
> power over somebody else.

Normally I don't get involved in this kind of debate, but I have to
say that this definition of violence is *far* too broad.  By this
definition, a parent telling a child, "You can't have that." is
performing a violent act, a stop sign is the government performing
violence on motorists, a policeman writing someone a ticket for
illegally parking is performing violence, and someone putting up a "no
shoplifting -- violators will be prosecuted" sign is performing
violence.

I don't think that most reasonable person would classify these as
violent acts.

I'd propose this definition:

  Any action which stands a serious risk of harming someone else is
  violence.

Note that harm does not have to be physical -- one can harm someone
psychologically, socially, economically, or possibly in other ways.

Note further that no value judgement is implied here:  some acts of
violence may, in fact, be good.  (For example, if I run headlong into
someone at full force, I stand a serious risk of harming them.
However, if I do this in an attempt to keep that person from being run
over by a bus, most people would count that as good.)

It should also be noted that violence may be unintentional -- the
person performing the violence may not realize or understand that
there is a potential for harm.

Lastly, it's not always clear-cut whether an action is violent or not;
two people may disagree on whether a particular action stands a
serious risk of harming someone else.  In fact, an action done to one
person may not be violent, because it does not stand a serious risk of
harming that person, while the same action, done to another person,
may be violent.  (For example, if I grab and kiss my wife at home,
that's not a violent act, because I know that it won't hurt her.
However, if I were to grab and kiss someone who might be hurt if I did
that to them, that would be a violent act.)



With that said, I think the biggest disagreement among mudders is not
about whether violence is bad, but about what is a violent act.  Some
believe that if you are acting in character, and only doing things to
someone else's character, there should be no serious potential for
harm -- that everyone in the mud should realize/believe that it's just
a game, and the characters are just playing pieces.

For another contingent, their characters are more than playing pieces
-- they are representatives of themselves in a virtual world.  From
that point of view, an attempt to harm a character is an attempt to
harm the person playing that character, and is therefore violence.

Most of us, I think, are somewhere in the middle, believing that some
actions are OK because "they just affect the characters" while others
are not OK or are less OK because they carry the potential of harming
the players.  However, there is still disagreement over "where the
line should be drawn."

My personal feeling is that there is no one place to draw the line:
different people are comfortable with different kinds of interactions
in a mud.  (In fact, people have differing comfort levels depending on
what mud they're on or on what character they're playing.)  Since it's
impossible for any mud to create one standard that all possible
players will agree on for what will constitute violence, I see this as
a reason why multiple muds should exist, and why muds should state
their policies up-front:  so that people can find a mud that has rules
they can be comfortable with.

To use a real-world analogy:  I don't like to be touched by anyone
that I don't know well.  I also don't like to be around rowdy,
screaming people.  For these reasons, when I'm seeking entertainment,
I avoid sporting events, rowdy nightclubs, and similar places.  In the
same way, someone in the online world who isn't comfortable with other
people interacting with their character in certain ways should avoid
muds where those kinds of interaction are seen as being OK.

>> There are two types of online mud games.  Those which operate
>> on the "principle of mutual consent" and those that do not.  

>> Violence can only occur in games that are operated under the 
>> principle of mutual consent.  This violence is also limited to mental 
>> effects generated by the victim as a result of violation of this 
>> principle.  Games that do not implement mutual consent, do not 
>> acknowledge their violence as real violence.  

I have to say that I don't agree with this either; the real world does
not operate on the principle of mutual consent (that is, it's quite
possible to do things to people without them consenting to them), but
I think we all will agree that violence does happen in the real world.

The fact that it's recognized that *characters* may attack each other
and that the players are expected not to take offense does not mean
that there is no potential for violence; just that there's no
potential for violence in certain ways.  One could still direct
violence against a player in any of several ways -- making threats
against that player, for example.

To put it another way, it's recognized in most "normal" paper games
that the players are in competition, and that they will act against
each other within the game.  Thus, in a Doom-style game, for example,
it's not a violent act to shoot at another player's character.  (That
is, it's not true violence... we could get into "pretend violence," but
this is getting too long already.)  However, it would be violent to
start uttering threats against another character's player (e.g., "Get
your character out of my way.  I know where you live.).

--
       |\      _,,,---,,_        Travis S. Casey  <efindel at io.com>
 ZZzz  /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_   No one agrees with me.  Not even me.
      |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (  `'-'
     '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)