OOC Harrassment after comments on poor RP

[Geronus]

To put what Lavigna said a bit more succinctly, we're not going to rule on things that aren't the subject of the complaint, so this inquiry will be about the Facebook post only, and the ruling is going to turn on whether we decide that we have both the responsibility and the jurisdiction to act. There are at least 3-4 Magistrates that are likely to say no to one or both of those questions, so I would guess that's where we're headed.

There is a bit of a pattern here though with this complaint and others. Regardless of how we decide to treat this matter, I would advise that Woelfy carefully consider how he chooses to interact with other players of this game in the future, particularly players of characters with whom his characters do not get along. There is a very nasty, personal and vicious tone that seems to be present whenever we end up dealing with Woelfy in this Courthouse; I don't like it, and I don't think it has a place in this community.

Bottom line Woelfy, this case aside, I do not want to see you in here again over issues of being civil to another player. I understand that it takes two to tango, but the consistent factor so far is you, not the players you get into fights with. There are ways to disagree with other players and defend yourself that don't involve over the top nastiness, so learn to rein it in. Consider this a warning that is separate from whatever we decide about this specific incident.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Excuse me, if I may butt in. Isn't it true that if we get evidence of clan instigated exclusion of other players, no matter what the source, it is acted upon? Therefore, if one player is harrassing or attacking another OOC, regardless of where it takes place so long as it is reported with reasonable amount of evidence, shouldn't we act upon it? Otherwise you're setting a very dangerous and volatile ruling whereupon it will be legal to do so on web pages besides this one? I'm not saying the magistrates should police anything not brought to them, but any online interaction that is should be judged.

[skiarxon@gmail.com]

Thing is the FB group got no rules whatsoever. It doesn't even say if it is an official group about BM.

[Shizzle]

There is a bit of a pattern here though with this complaint and others. Regardless of how we decide to treat this matter, I would advise that Woelfy carefully consider how he chooses to interact with other players of this game in the future, particularly players of characters with whom his characters do not get along. There is a very nasty, personal and vicious tone that seems to be present whenever we end up dealing with Woelfy in this Courthouse; I don't like it, and I don't think it has a place in this community.

An advice along these lines is all I hoped to expect from this. In no way do I think Kyle should be punished at this point, certainly with the evidence provided. As I wrote in my previous post.

I disagree with the tango argument, though, unless Kyle can provide something that shows I have been disrespectful to him in a way remotely similar to the facebook post. When I reacted on facebook I didn't even realise Kyle was Guile's player, it was only afterwards (when Skarxion added 'Jaeger sucks', and when I got Kyle's message). I would have reacted with QQ on anyone's post phrased in the way he did, more as a taunt to entice him to prove his point (because the initial post was very vague). I thought that was more than clear because of the question I added right after ('Any concrete examples you want to see discussed?').

[Geronus]

I disagree with the tango argument, though, unless Kyle can provide something that shows I have been disrespectful to him in a way remotely similar to the facebook post. When I reacted on facebook I didn't even realise Kyle was Guile's player, it was only afterwards (when Skarxion added 'Jaeger sucks', and when I got Kyle's message). I would have reacted with QQ on anyone's post phrased in the way he did, more as a taunt to entice him to prove his point (because the initial post was very vague). I thought that was more than clear because of the question I added right after ('Any concrete examples you want to see discussed?').

I was thinking more about earlier incidents than this one specifically, and I also wanted to preempt the obvious rebuttal. As far as this scenario goes, unless there's more going on than meets the eye, I would be inclined to label the response to your comment disproportionate.

[Vellos]

Regarding jurisdiction, these cases (especially the first) had jurisdictional debate as well, about the Forum:
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3357.30.html
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3908.60.html

I believe IRC was also discussed.

The criteria from the first case for jurisdiction on forum cases was:
[/quote]"The Magistrates hold that they have jurisdiction in cases arising from the forum, provided that three conditions hold: first, that a connection between a forum account and a user ID exists; second, that forum moderators have already attempted to redress the issue by comment deletion or thread control as necessary; third, that such means have failed to resolve or end the dispute, and it is of such a nature as to arouse general concern or interest."[/quote]

For the Facebook group, in this case, the user ID condition holds, it is unclear if "moderator action" is possible, and methinks that this is a case of such a nature (due to being in a totally public group) as to arouse general concern or interest for the community.

Thus, I think we have jurisdiction for such complaints when they arise.

Ruling is trickier. Kyle is repeatedly showing up in complaints and, frankly, the level of vitriol in his messages isn't acceptable for any player at any time: even private messages between players outside of the game. Bully and cuss out other players? You can take your ball and go home.

That said, we've had three cases that touch on this harassment issue, AFAIK, so we should really look at what we said in the past, and decide if its useful, applies, and we still agree with it:
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3908.60.html
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3863.30.html
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3596.60.html

The first ended in a verdict declining to uphold the complaint because the accused's comment was in isolation, he was apologetic, and there was no evidence of a deeper player-level feud.

The second ended in a Titan message posted in Swordfell that advised players to avoid IG OOC messages, and instead use the forums or private messages: it concluded with "OOC insults against other players will not be tolerated, and should be reported immediately."

The third one ended in the players talking it out, apologizing, and moving on without need for higher level intervention.

----

Kyle has been told in a very spectacular way, a Titan message, that OOC insults will not be tolerated. His vitriolic comment is not in isolation but is rather part of a long and growing pattern of bitterness and anger at other players which is now spilling over into increasingly more and more public areas. Kyle is totally unapologetic in virtually every instance. He has not, AFAIK (please correct me if I'm wrong), shown any interest or ability to reconcile with players he dislikes.

Would anyone like to point out any flaws in my reasoning?

Edit: typos

[Geronus]

Per arguments I have made previously, I am also not convinced that this is an area we should disavow any and all responsibility for. The Social Contract reads "No verbal attacks, insults or harrassment of other players. Err on the side of caution, especially if you don't know the other player well." It does not specify a medium. One could argue that the medium is implied to be the game itself, but it could just as well imply the opposite. My feeling is that if something is going on that's bad enough for someone to report it, it doesn't really matter how it happened as long as it's related to Battlemaster, and the content of the message in question clearly reveals that it is.

While I am cognizant of the possibility of overreach here, I am very much against the notion that if Battlemaster-related bullying or harassment is taking place we can not or should not do anything about it unless it happens directly through the game. That approach seems morally suspect, and amounts to tacit acceptance of players treating other players badly so long as they are careful to do it outside of the game. I think that the reaction would be different all around if this was a case of repeated, sustained harassment, so the question becomes why is that? Is there really a difference between that and this? Only one of degree I'd say, so I don't think we can hold that we should rule on one but not the other.

Some of us clearly find it distasteful to have to intervene in cases such as this, viewing them as petty differences that two players should be able to work out themselves. "Get over it," as the saying goes. However, if players could always work these things out, we wouldn't be necessary. Sometimes they can't, or they won't, and we have to step in and put a stop to the bickering. There is a cost to this game when pettiness like this gets out of hand or goes on for too long, a cost in disillusionment and disappointment from the players. It takes away from the atmosphere and damages the game. That's part of what made what was happening in Swordfell so toxic; all the players in that realm were exposed to spiteful personal conflict between players. If none of them ended up losing interest in the game as a result, I'd consider us lucky. I can tell you right now that if that was the first realm I joined as a new player, I probably wouldn't have bothered to keep playing. That's one reason why the Social Contract exists in the first place.

As far as Vellos' reasoning goes, I agree on every point so far.

[Geronus]

Whether or not Kyle has himself been harassed is largely irrelevant to this case. It's not the subject at hand, and even if true it doesn't excuse anything, though I will reiterate one final time on the odd chance that he's even still reading this thread that he should report any harassment he is suffering to us in a separate case so that we can try to put a stop to it. It's not trivial, it's not a waste of our time, and it's completely and totally unacceptable behavior. If I ever see a case in here where someone is going outside the game to email, Social media, whatever, to bully and harass another player on an ongoing basis they will suffer the worst consequences that I can manage to secure. While we Magistrates are limited to a three-day lock for routine cases, in a case of sustained harassment (which to my knowledge would be unprecedented) I would be inclined to seek out the possibility of a far more significant punishment from Tom directly. That is all that I have to say on the subject and I do not think that it should be discussed any further in this thread, because in the end it is a separate, if serious, issue.

As far as this case goes, the most relevant extenuating factors here would be evidence of an apology or some sense of remorse on the part of Kyle himself. Since those are notably lacking, I have a hard time feeling much sympathy for him at the moment. Indeed, the sense he's communicated is that not only is he not sorry, he believes that he's justified in his behavior by the behavior of others, which is not a belief that I share. Even if he has been under some pressure lately you'd think that if he flew off the handle in a moment of emotion he wouldn't have such a hard time saying "I'm sorry I lashed out at you," particularly since Shizzle has gone out of his way to extend an olive branch here.

Given that, I'm not especially keen on letting this slide. At this point we need to move further discussion into the Backroom and start a poll.

[Fury]

A discussion has already started in the backroom. Everyone else can take anything not constructive to FaceBook some unknown social media. Moderators, feel free to give out warnings.

[Geronus]

This thread is getting way off topic.

I will reiterate one more time that the alleged campaign of harassment against Kyle has nothing to do with this case. The last page and a half of this thread have been mostly posts about how Kyle is the victim here, or rebuttals. If you truly believe that, then assemble your evidence and open a new case against the people harassing Kyle. Otherwise it is irrelevant. This isn't about things that happened in or as a result of Swordfell. This is about what Kyle said to Shizzle, which to my knowledge has absolutely nothing to do with events in Swordfell, seeing as their interaction appears to have taken place entirely through Thalmarkin.

I will henceforth immediately remove any posts that even mention Kyle being harassed, or mention Swordfell or any of the previous cases involving Swordfell. Those are separate issues, and do not in any way excuse what happened here. One is both unsubstantiated and deserving of its own case, while the other is effectively settled. It was wrong of all parties, including and especially myself, to bring up either one.

I have, for now, let the last page or so of posts remain untouched. If people insist on continuing along that line of argument, I will happily delete the entire tangent; at the moment only my respect for the parties involved has prevented me from deleting the entire thing, seeing as none of it has been relevant to this case.

Edit: On second thought, and upon further review, I am immediately removing posts that contain personal attacks.

[Vellos]

Tim,

You saw it?

If that's true, start a case. The Magistrates have heard third-party cases before, we can do it again.

What gets me here is all these generalities protecting somebody and yet nobody has yet supplied a single concrete instance of Kyle being harassed!

That should be trivially easy to do. And no, "needling" on the forum doesn't count. If it did, we would all have so much cause to yell profanities at Chenier every day it would be comical.

Geronus: This one showed up right after I posted. Last one. No more, or a lot of posts get deleted.

[Geronus]

Personally I'm advocating for a warning, not a lock. No one has yet overtly pushed for a lock, and the plaintiff Shizzle has called for dismissing the case altogether.

My own judgment is that it's simply not OK to tell another player to go !@#$ themselves, and I want to make it clear that that is not OK. Hence why I am voting guilty with a warning. If that's the consensus, then that warning will be published here and the precedent will be set; that's all I personally am looking for out of this.

Edit: And I will add, if Woelfy had deigned to apologize I might even have been inclined to skip on the warning.

[Miriam Ics]

Do you have a case?
Shizzle said "lets put it behind". Woelfy said "Reporting it, when it is something so childish, seems a waste of the magistrates time."
They don't want to go ahead with this also Woelfy delete his char and his email account therefore deleting all and every evidence.

I think the only decent effort to do now is make sure that we have rules that will apply also to legitimate social media groups and I really hope next time something like this happen we will have rules to follow.

Geronus: I have deleted OT comments. Stick to THIS CASE, PEOPLE.

[Geronus]

Do you have a case?
Shizzle said "lets put it behind". Woelfy said "Reporting it, when it is something so childish, seems a waste of the magistrates time."
They don't want to go ahead with this also Woelfy delete his char and his email account therefore deleting all and every evidence.

As I believe I have made clear, I do not regard this as a waste of time. Setting a standard of civility between players and maintaining a friendly atmosphere in this game are important goals. Again, I'm not advocating for locking Woelfy's account here, I simply do not find it acceptable to tell another player to go !@#$ himself. A warning will suffice to set a precedent to that effect.

I think the only decent effort to do now is make sure that we have rules that will apply also to legitimate social media groups and I really hope next time something like this happen we will have rules to follow.

I agree, which is why it is doubly important not to drop this case just because some people feel bad for Woelfy. By issuing a ruling, we will provide the community with a precedent that can help to guide players' future decisions on how they interact with other players. And keep in mind that it is entirely possible that the other Magistrates will vote Not Guilty. Vellos and I are just two voices. I haven't heard much at all from the other Magistrates other than Lavigna, who has recused herself from voting.

[egamma]

All offtopic posts have been moved here: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,4222.0.html

A reminder about the Courthouse rules:

• remain strictly on topic. Information relevant to the actual case only. This goes especially for speculations, hypotheticals, variations - discussing of the this could be... if... kind are unwanted. We have a specific case before us and will decide that case, nothing else.
• be positive and friendly. Don't insult or troll.
• add new information. Repeating a point does not increase its truth value.

Furthermore, a lot of the magistrate chatter was moved. I can't move that to the moderator sub-board, where it more properly belongs. Indirik or Tom can sort that out if needed.