Mahz's Dev Journal

[HeySeuss]

@Ellri age of consent doesn't matter for online depictions of the act, your arguing is futile. What matters is age of majority and laws surrounding erotica.

@Captain Jordan

Which, in the case here, are governed by the statutes involving enticement of a minor and so forth.

It is futile, because we're going to slam the door on that shit where we find it out of the necessity of keeping this site alive and well which is the whole reason we have the rules in the first place.

We're going to be steering clear of any of the ambiguities and gray areas here. Expect that to remain a thing in the protracted future.

[HeySeuss]

@Ellri age of consent doesn't matter for online depictions of the act, your arguing is futile. What matters is age of majority and laws surrounding erotica.

<Snipped quote by HeySeuss>

Reading erotica isn't sexual activity, HeySeuss. You should look into obscenity laws instead.

@Captain Jordan

Good luck; cybersex has been prosecuted in the past -- the people writing it. Yes, the prosecutors are douches, yes, it's usually part of a larger sting involving actual attempts to meet a minor in real life, but we're trying to avoid getting into that whole hairball in the first place.

[Ellri]

Good, @HeySeuss... Good.

[Ruby]

18 and up is a pretty universal age-line. The only reason this enters the realm of site policy, at all, is protecting the Guild and those who run it. Except it's not, and it shouldn't be: every rule from the Fonz to this smut-section-age-restriction is in some way representative of the Guild and those behind it.

I feel confident in saying even a purely academic discussion on age limits lower than 18 ignores the fact that there are very real, very creepy, people out there. (And neverminds that even most 18 year olds don't have their lives, let alone their sexuality, well put together.) And as members of the Guild, we'd like to protect our younger members as much as we possibly can. Sure, because we want to not be charged for some Federal crime, but also because anything else just makes us uncomfortable as human beings.

18 and up seems to fit the spirit of the Guild well enough, though I'm sure there are those out there who'd like it to be younger, just as I'd be okay with it being older still.

[Syben]

@HeySeuss Thanks for clearing that up.

Spam is about all the immoral this site needs.

[Ellri]

Actually, this is fairly well-covered in the Fonz-rule... It's not cool with relationships, or in this case RPs, of a sexual nature with someone considerably younger than yourself.

But for the sake of the of legal technicalities, a number might be necessary.

[HeySeuss]

The number was already stated.

[Ruby]

And laser etched into crystal, at this point.

[Rilla]

Will there be a way to ensure whoever joins is indeed 18+? Or will those participating just have to hope and pray that everyone involved is just as honest as Jim in Liar, Liar?

I agree that 18 should be the rule(Even here in NC, where it seems to be 16), but it seems without a set way to do it, it could be a big risk for people to take - even if they wanted, I mean really wanted, some grown up time textually.

[HeySeuss]

Will there be a way to ensure whoever joins is indeed 18+? Or will those participating just have to hope and pray that everyone involved is just as honest as Jim in Liar, Liar?

I agree that 18 should be the rule(Even here in NC, where it seems to be 16), but it seems without a set way to do it, it could be a big risk for people to take - even if they wanted, I mean really wanted, some grown up time textually.

@Rilla

There's no particularly good way to verify ages and that's a problem across the board in any online forum community, and that's just a reality of life here, so yeah, pretty much gotta just hope and pray. But we've made it clear that it's against the rules and a bad idea anyway -- if you're underage and deceive a partner and then engage in that stuff and a parent sees it, you could be landing the partner into a shit-heap of trouble. Even if they aren't convicted, because the laws are a gray area, their lives will be seriously disrupted, perhaps permanently. That was, incidentally, a prior conversation over in RP discussion.

Hopefully, this sort of thing won't be an issue and we can respect each other's wishes and try to be aware that what we do can harm others. That exhortation won't stop a predator, but we're talking more about someone that's misrepresenting themselves in an RP interest check or online in general more than a predator.

So I suppose we'll have to appeal to people to be honest, and we're going to still clamp down on any pedo shit that goes on because that's just a no-brainer.

[LegendBegins]

<Snipped quote by Rilla>

There's no particularly good way to verify ages and that's a problem across the board in any online forum community, and that's just a reality of life here, so yeah, pretty much gotta just hope and pray. But we've made it clear that it's against the rules and a bad idea anyway -- if you're underage and deceive a partner and then engage in that stuff and a parent sees it, you could be landing the partner into a shit-heap of trouble. Even if they aren't convicted, because the laws are a gray area, their lives will be seriously disrupted, perhaps permanently. That was, incidentally, a prior conversation over in RP discussion.

Hopefully, this sort of thing won't be an issue and we can respect each other's wishes and try to be aware that what we do can harm others. That exhortation won't stop a predator, but we're talking more about someone that's misrepresenting themselves in an RP interest check or online in general more than a predator.

So I suppose we'll have to appeal to people to be honest, and we're going to still clamp down on any pedo shit that goes on because that's just a no-brainer.

@HeySeuss

What if an RP brings it up, such as the Vikings example, as discussed earlier, but does not go into detail about it? Does the concept itself warrent the hammer, or is it just those who wish to use it to fulfil their sick fantasies?

[HeySeuss]

<Snipped quote by HeySeuss>

What if an RP brings it up, such as the Vikings example, as discussed earlier, but does not go into detail about it? Does the concept itself warrent the hammer, or is it just those who wish to use it to fulfil their sick fantasies?

@LegendBegins

Well, even American TV allows for shows and fiction about sexual victimization of the underaged in a non-explicit manner, such as Law and Order: Special Victims' Unit, whereas an explicit depiction is pretty much verboten. If it's an explicit depiction involving the underaged, it's a ban. Referring to such events indirectly as part of a plot is generally okay (not saying 'always' because someone will try to use that loophole, and I really want to discourage that shit from the outset) but a detailing of the abuse will not fly and is ban territory.

I'm not sure why people want to split hairs on this. We're going to err on the side of caution about this stuff, so I wouldn't suggest trying to find a gray area.

[Silver Fox]

I just hope if there is a set restriction that someone doesn't end up hacking my profile(again) and causing me to be automatically kicked out because I'm supposedly "underage"

It's quite happened on several other sites with adult content (although I was 19 at the time, now almost 21(yay almost drinking age))

Most seem to enjoy having people put their age on their profile, go through the whole email confirmation thing and accepting the terms.

Course, someone, dunno who, seems to enjoy changing my age to like a twelve year old, and get banned.

Didn't even want things just smutty smut things. Just rps where it can be interpreted into story.

So. Cross fingers it doesn't happen here as well. XD

[Lillian Thorne]

I'm not sure why people want to split hairs on this. We're going to err on the side of caution about this stuff, so I wouldn't suggest trying to find a gray area.

@HeySeuss

This, what exactly are you all after here?

[LegendBegins]

<Snipped quote by LegendBegins>

Well, even American TV allows for shows and fiction about sexual victimization of the underaged in a non-explicit manner, such as Law and Order: Special Victims' Unit, whereas an explicit depiction is pretty much verboten. If it's an explicit depiction involving the underaged, it's a ban. Referring to such events indirectly as part of a plot is generally okay (not saying 'always' because someone will try to use that loophole, and I really want to discourage that shit from the outset) but a detailing of the abuse will not fly and is ban territory.

I'm not sure why people want to split hairs on this. We're going to err on the side of caution about this stuff, so I wouldn't suggest trying to find a gray area.

@HeySeuss

I wouldn't say that it's looking for a gray area, but I would say that it is very important to define it down to the line, so idiots who break the rules have no excuse.

<Snipped quote by HeySeuss>

This, what exactly are you all after here?

@Lillian Thorne

Drawing a solid, objective line between breaking the rules and following them.

[Rilla]

So I suppose the general rule is "If you think it might get you banned, or in legal trouble, ask a mod/write around it/leave it out"?

[Lillian Thorne]

This is still very much in development so the press for details is a little premature, don't you think?

[LegendBegins]

This is still very much in development so the press for details is a little premature, don't you think?

@Lillian Thorne

No, because these rules already exist for even clean RPs.

[HeySeuss]

So I suppose the general rule is "If you think it might get you banned, or in legal trouble, ask a mod/write around it/leave it out"?

@Rilla

Or the site in legal trouble. We're going to have a disclaimer on this opt-in that dumps the responsibility for posts and disclosures on the individual as much as possible, something that just about every forum does, but that doesn't mean the site can't get in trouble theoretically. Everything we intend to do will be geared toward avoiding that trouble.

That's been the modus operandi for our policies from the getgo. I mean, we've been bitten by Google before, no one should be eager to repeat the experience.

Edit: As to what gets one banned, I think "explicit depictions of underage sex" is pretty clear, but at the same time we're going to use our discretion on this, and that's just going to have to be acceptable. It's only come up once, and the people involved were writing about a bondage scenario involving a seven year old girl and they tried to rationalize their way out of it with legalistic mumbo-jumbo. (Note: We banned them) I realize you want hard and fast assurances, but hey, what can I say? We're not painting ourselves in a corner on this (we will now pause for cries of 'tyrants!') because, end of the day, we've only banned about eleven people off this community in the last year (minus something like thousands of spam bots) and we tend to think that this is a pretty good track record.

End of the day, once again, my recommendation is to stay well the heck away from the line separating reference to sexual abuse and the a plot that somehow venerates it or describes it in explicit detail. If we're revolted, and we're not precisely prudes, we're going to err on the side of 'keeping the Guild safe' because there's this entire community that exists here beyond one or two people crazy enough to mess around with pedophilia themes in their RP's.

We've already been through enough in the Guild thanks to people that felt entitled to activities that threatened its existence. We're through with that phase.

[Ellri]

This is still very much in development so the press for details is a little premature, don't you think?

@Lillian Thorne

Don't you know? People here love discussing to death features that have barely made it to the drawing board, let alone to the coding stage...