Banning for Chronic Ongoing Immersion Ruining

Mistsparrow and I discussed this for quite a while and we've decided to ban a player for doing a lot of IC/OOC boundary crossing. IC story threads have already been resolved.

We're sorry to have to do this; the player in question was not necessarily bad; just not suited to Song of Avaria. IC/OOC boundary crossing is disruptive to the game as a whole. Right now, during alpha phase, it's just too much for us to deal with having to correct something every other day. We're also trying hard to form the start of the game's culture, and we don't want repetitive fourth-wall-breakage to become one of the basic building blocks here. Being able to play deep character stories in an immersive way is our goal.

Here are a few examples, so that other players can understand what problematic situations to hopefully avoid:

• roleplaying massive new things about a character's background (like that you are actually a very important political figure) without clearing it with staff,
• taking information from the wiki and spreading it IC when it was made explicit through announcements that this information wasn't available,
• blatantly quoting popular media and historic speeches in a barely-veiled IC parody (this happened even after giving a warning specifically about it),
• spreading misinformation about IC metaphysics related to alpha bugs that we had already corrected and announced publicly

We also had a few validated complaints from various players about this person, including:

•  what appeared to be OOCly-motivated IC mood swings, 
  •  If you're upset about something IRL, log out and take a few minutes, put in a petition if you need -- but don't play angry. 
  •  If your character is angry, have thoughts, have tells, have story arcs that support this IC emotion.
•  uncomfortably-predatory misogynistic IC behavior that was not written as a character flaw.
  • (Note: this could've been dealt with right away, if it had been more egregious, but after a very long conversation with the player, it seemed unintended.)
  •   If you don't understand how to treat sensitive themes carefully, then don't tackle them.

There are also other issues that we're not going to make public because they were discussed privately with the player in question; and this should be enough to make an example of what to avoid.

Some of this was reported when we first opened, and we spent quite a while discussing many issues with the player, and they seemed to be trying to amend their behavior, at least as far as some very specific things went. But new things keep cropping up regardless, and we've spent literal hours trying to teach this player how to play a lore-heavy story-focused roleplay game, and we're not willing to continue investing any more time into them for now. So, this is intended as a temp ban, but after talking to this player for the last time, they concurred they weren't a culture fit for this game either -- so it is unlikely they will return after alpha, regardless. There are plenty of "light RP" games where this sort of behavior is considered more tolerable and even encouraged as witty and fun and genuine.

Best wishes to this player, wherever they may go.

Edit: Based on a (substantiated) tip from a community member, we're making this ban a permanent one.

I apologize as I'm mobile and it's been a long day so I'll probably be too succinct. One, thank you for keeping us updated. I know this was a tough one. 

Two, I feel like you touched on this before, but I can't remember why the name isn't shared in these banning announcements? I know you have a good reason. And, I mean, I knew the second I read the title. But I feel like not sharing could just lead to OOC gossip, ie. "Who are they talking about?" so I was just curious. 

I could be wrong, but I don't think that naming people necessarily lessens OOC gossip. Does it? I'm kind of torn on that. I hate to name-and-shame people. While you might be able to put the dots together, maybe not everyone can, and more may not be able to if the game gets larger. 

In my mind, the benefits of a policy of transparency about banning are that it 1) helps set a precedent for what the community can expect, and 2) holds staff to a certain standard of not just randomly banning people we don't like or something. 

And the main drawback is having unresolved story threads -- but we will endeavor to have those resolved IC in any case, so it doesn't seem necessary to me to give names. 

Again, could be wrong about this, It might just be cognitive dissonance on my part because like I said, I really hate the prospect of shaming people.

This was a really valid decision IMO (imagine I came up with a more eloquent way to say that though, I am too sleep deprived rn)

Player of Zahara, here is what was said last time regarding name revealing on bans!

"This is a good point to make. I'm cautious about revealing the names of characters when taking this kind of punitive action because I don't want to potentially smear people or cause extra drama, especially in the case of a temporary ban. My thoughts are that the important thing about the ban is the example that it sets for everyone about what kind of community we're trying to cultivate. " - Pilgrim 

I was sad that this became necessary, but I also agree that this was necessary.

It was a totally valid decision, and I know it wasn't fun for you.

Thank you, Pilgrim for reiterating your reasons and Firo for taking the time to find the last wording of the reason given (that I knew I read somewhere but was being too lazy on my mobile to find).

I agree with you, Pilgrim, that the point is more the reason behind the ban than who was banned. In our current very small community, it's obvious enough when we lose a player in this way as it affects so many people. I'm thinking more of when we open up and we have even more players and you read about some vague banning and then a week later, your character is suddenly like, "Oh, wait, I haven't seen Bob in ages," because you didn't realize that pof Bob was the person banned. For me, it doesn't feel like shaming. But I can understand your stance on that! Thank you again for clarifying.

Personally I think naming people would feel uncomfortable to me. As you said, it's kind of irrespective of whether "everyone" knows or not. It's what is implied by naming, which is public shaming. There is really no other reason to be specific, except to satisfy curiosity in the case of those who don't know. Neither of these impulses (curiosity or shaming/schadenfreude) is necessarily problematic on the part of a player, but the staff position needs to set an example of keeping the cleanest possible house, as it were. The staff has all the secrets, all of OUR secrets, and we must trust them to treat our secrets with discretion - even when we annoy them, which we undoubtedly will. :D

Edited to add:

Of course clearing up confusion over the absence of a PC is necessary but I kind of feel this is covered under Pilgrim's acknowledgement that IC storylines need to be resolved as part of the process of these types of bans.

I would just like to clarify that I don't care either way on this matter. I'm just presenting another thought: What if I've been RPing with Nancy a lot. Our stories are pretty intertwined. We're having a great time. And then all of a sudden, Nancy stops playing. It even seems like she's killed off her character. Which makes me feel bad because our characters were business partners and now I'm left high and dry. Her IC story is wrapped up by staff for me, but I'm still left wondering if she stopped playing because of me or if she just stopped enjoying the game... because I don't realize that she was banned because I have a very strict, "Don't talk to people OOC rule," so I have no communication with the player at all.

Maybe this isn't a big deal to some people. But it was just a sudden thought I had.

To Zahra:

That absolutely is a thing that can happen, and it can be sort of stressful when you are left not knowing what happened, after having had an investment in a PC who disappears. Humans are distressed by situations that lack resolution, and anxious people like me are given to wondering if we are somehow the cause of some calamity.

Just for me personally, though, I don't think that discomfort outweighs the critical necessity of players trusting staff to behave impartially, respectfully, and compassionately, even with players who have violated policies or been asked to leave. If they do that, then we all feel a high degree of confidence that they will treat us the same way. If, on the other hand, their respect seems conditional, like say on whether or not you have broken a rule or done something they feel places you outside the group, then we will tend to feel a sense of insecurity - could that happen to me? What if I didn't know I was doing something wrong? Could their distaste for me on a personal level ever trump their implicit promises of impartiality and confidentiality?

We really invest a lot in our RP, and we do and say things in character that leave us emotionally and psychologically vulnerable. We need to be able to trust that the people who are privy to all of this are going to treat us with care, even if we don't see eye to eye with them, and the only way they can maintain that trust is to demonstrate that that care is something they value, through their actions. If they do it when they maybe don't *have to*, because that person is banned now and gone, then we can really rest assured that they mean it. IMO, of course.

I think this is a wise decision to not say who it is, even though oocly I'd be curious about it. But its really none of my business really. If I were to be playing with someone and they were banned oocly, my instinct is generally to think they've disappeared either dead of an illness, poison, animal attack, or otherwise. But then again that's just me and I get very deep into my characters and don't care to know who the person is. It would break immersion for me. However I do see how people can be quite upset by a loss of character if they've been playing with them quite allot. But we doo icly live in a very harsh world where violence and i illness are a factor. I'd be more upset if these things weren't a factor. But the truth is they are, and even though I'd be confused and a upset icly for a while my char would just consign themselves to never knowing.

I would icly wonder for a while or grieve if the person was really part of my ic circle of course. But after a while my char would probably just consign herself to never knowing what happened. But that's me and everyone can't be me.