# Please read: ENW policy regarding molestation, rape, and other such discussion



## Piratecat

Up until now, we've never needed guidelines about this. In the recent event a discussion about in-game rape occurred under very congenial "I abhor this in real life but it occurs in my game world" discussion, and it very understandably made a lot of people furious. That's a problem in part because the moderators, quite correctly following our rules, moderated the people who lost their temper and not the polite person who brought up the subject regarding his game. 'Cause hey, using babies as human shields is truly repugnant too, but a thread where bad guys in a game do this won't even raise an eyebrow; shouldn't a discussion of in-game rape be treated the same way?

We've decided, quite correctly, not a friggin' chance.

Baby-shields don't require a trigger warning. One in five people aren't subject to baby-shields during their college years. And while we've been moderating according to our guidelines, in the case of discussion surrounding sexual assault the moderators and administrators here agree that our guidelines are flat-out wrong.

So we apologize, and here's the deal. Like racism or adult topics, this isn't the place to discuss your campaign's variants of rape or molestation. *We don't care, we don't want to hear it, and we won't put up with it.* We will moderate accordingly. Folks, please report it if you run across it.

Questions?


----------



## Killer GM

So does this mean that the people who were saying things like "I hope you get raped" to the people who were offended by the original topic will be banned?

And if not, why not?


----------



## Piratecat

As always, we don't discuss moderation with anyone other than the person being moderated. We'll be cleaning up this mess over the next few days, and will look at folks on a case-by-case basis -- probably as you'd expect. If you're hoping for a public pillory for people being asshats, though, be aware that problems will be resolved privately.


----------



## whiteheadw

*Thank you for the clarification*

Just wanted to pile on the kudos.  I think the subject under discussion is not fun and therefore doesn't is not a part of my game.

Thanks!
WTW


----------



## Piratecat

Squidster said:


> The solution is not secrecy, but transparency.



Good point. I quote this before I spam-ban Squidster to thank him for a really nicely written post that unfortunately came from the SomethingAwful guys trying to get a rise out of ENW. We're not a big fan of cross-board drama or board invasions, of course. That's always been the case.

This post aside, moderation happens privately.


----------



## El Mahdi

I won't comment on specific moderation.  I will however give a well-deserved compliment to our Moderation Staff.  The moderation process here at ENWorld works, and works well - but not only because of the process, but also the people involved with it.

I think this is an excellent policy change.

Thank You, Moderators.


----------



## Mark CMG

Seems prudent.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin

Good call. All the dogpiling was painful to watch, but I'm really glad you've managed to hash it out and clarify the policy.

Thanks to all of you!


----------



## Artur Hawkwing

Just thought I'd throw this in for all of those involved. Great policy.


----------



## Dice4Hire

I also agree. I think Enworld has gotten a tad nastier in topics since a couple years ago. , so this is a good change.

Now if posters could lower their cursing a bit it would be even better. That has been on the upswing for a while also. Sure it is not blatant, but wink wink nudge nudge level, but it is stil not necessary.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Guess I'll be the one to disagree.  I don't really know what the specifics of this "new policy" mean, and what the boundaries are (mentioning that evil people in your game commit rape?  very lightly/generally mentioning how they do it, such as through physical force vs. date rape?  and so on...) but I don't like the sound of it.  It's a fantasy game and includes monsters/NPCs that are literally evil incarnate, and even the good aligned folks base their adventures around killing (bad) people and taking their stuff.

Doesn't seem prudent to me, seems puritanical.  But ultimately it doesn't affect me really at all to not talk about rape, so I don't really care.  And I'm well aware I hold the minority opinion on this...


----------



## Alzrius

I'm completely in agreement with StreamOfTheSky on this. This new policy strikes me as unnecessary and more trouble than its worth.

I didn't see the offending thread in question, but I was under the implication that any graphic discussion/description of rape or other sexual assault was already forbidden under the more general Eric's Grandma rule. Rape is a form of sexual assault, and the aforementioned rule already prohibited anything too sexual from being discussed on EN World.

Piratecat mentioned the ratio of women who are raped (presumably in the United States) during their college years; an abhorrently-high one out of every five. That's beyond horrible, but according to the FBI statistics for violent crime in America in the year 2009, almost ten times as many people will be the victim of aggravated assault. And yet here we revel in a game about killing things and taking their stuff.

Yes, sexual crimes are particularly heinous, but I see a strong dividing line between fantasy and reality, and don't consider that discussing something in the context of a game to have any moral or ethical implications in the real world. Fantasy violence is, quite simply, no big deal to us. Making fantasy sexual violence - particularly when it's almost never discussed here in detail - into some sort ill-defined taboo seems like it will create more problems than it solves.

There's a demigod of rape in the _Book of Erotic Fantasy_ - can I not discuss him at all? R. A. Salvatori's book _Road of the Patriarch_ implies that Artemis Entreri was raped/molested by his uncle as a child; is that never to be spoken of here? Is all discussion of Thomas Covenant to be forbidden forever? 

I respect EN World's moderators greatly; they've done a fine job of keeping this site from degenerating, like so many other bulletin boards, into a pit of vitriol. But anything can be taken too far, and I think this is the first step in that direction.


----------



## Stoutfish

I personally feel the members of this board are mature enough to discuss these topics in an academic matter.  However, if you feel a few bad apples can not, then I suppose I can accept this new policy.


----------



## Darwinism

Alzrius said:


> I'm completely in agreement with StreamOfTheSky on this. This new policy strikes me as unnecessary and more trouble than its worth.
> 
> I didn't see the offending thread in question, but I was under the implication that any graphic discussion/description of rape or other sexual assault was already forbidden under the more general Eric's Grandma rule. Rape is a form of sexual assault, and the aforementioned rule already prohibited anything too sexual from being discussed on EN World.
> 
> Piratecat mentioned the ratio of women who are raped (presumably in the United States) during their college years; an abhorrently-high one out of every five. That's beyond horrible, but according to the FBI statistics for violent crime in America in the year 2009, almost ten times as many people will be the victim of aggravated assault. And yet here we revel in a game about killing things and taking their stuff.
> 
> Yes, sexual crimes are particularly heinous, but I see a strong dividing line between fantasy and reality, and don't consider that discussing something in the context of a game to have any moral or ethical implications in the real world. Fantasy violence is, quite simply, no big deal to us. Making fantasy sexual violence - particularly when it's almost never discussed here in detail - into some sort ill-defined taboo seems like it will create more problems than it solves.
> 
> There's a demigod of rape in the _Book of Erotic Fantasy_ - can I not discuss him at all? R. A. Salvatori's book _Road of the Patriarch_ implies that Artemis Entreri was raped/molested by his uncle as a child; is that never to be spoken of here? Is all discussion of Thomas Covenant to be forbidden forever?
> 
> I respect EN World's moderators greatly; they've done a fine job of keeping this site from degenerating, like so many other bulletin boards, into a pit of vitriol. But anything can be taken too far, and I think this is the first step in that direction.




Oh man good troll, way to mockingly defend horrible people's 'right' to romanticize rape

The BoEF and Salvatore references really sealed it, mentioning two of the worst things to happen to fantasy writing = priceless

Oh and if you weren't trolling and this is actually your really sheltered opinion: fantasy is, indeed, about romanticized violence. But against non-specific targets; it's when you're like FATAL and sub in black people for orcs and broadly state that all women are totally asking for it that you're terrible, not when you're slaughtering X or Y or Z always chaotic evil monster.


----------



## Umbran

Darwinism said:


> Oh man good troll, way to mockingly defend horrible people's 'right' to romanticize rape




Okay, in a thread about the rules and proper behavior on the boards, having to make this note is dreadfully ironic.

If you think someone is a troll, please report it and then leave it alone.  Going head to head gives a troll what he or she wants, you know.  And if he isn't a troll, you just insulted someone and gave grounds for argument.

In general, while feedback on policy is welcome, don't think that we'll accept you folks arguing with each other in this thread.  Expect that all the mods are going to be reading this, so you need to be on your best behavior, folks.


----------



## Piratecat

We're not going to debate this, guys. It's not going to impact 99% of people on this site, mostly because they're already wise enough to use good common sense when posting. And it's okay if you disagree with me, but it isn't optional.


----------



## Darwinism

The problem with rape as a serious topic is that it merits serious thought and an extremely thoughtful and mature environment, not a scene where anyone is free to just put forth their interpretations of it like "if she enjoys it it's not rape," so unless you can guarantee people will treat it as such it's much better off as a topic left unexplored.

That's it. There's no, "But you see this fiction I like treats rape super seriously can't I brag about that," and there's no, "but you see X crime is more common so rape is obviously the lesser crime."


----------



## Stoutfish

Darwinism said:


> The problem with rape as a serious topic is that it merits serious thought and an extremely thoughtful and mature environment, not a scene where anyone is free to just put forth their interpretations of it like "if she enjoys it it's not rape," so unless you can guarantee people will treat it as such it's much better off as a topic left unexplored.
> 
> That's it. There's no, "But you see this fiction I like treats rape super seriously can't I brag about that," and there's no, "but you see X crime is more common so rape is obviously the lesser crime."




Yes, but you see, your post was quite hostile and would not lead to any logical discussion.  It's quite ironic that your intentions are really no better then justifying rape like you so mentioned.

*Mod Edit:*  I warned folks to be on best behavior.  So, Stoutfish here won't be taking part in the rest of this conversation.  Don't get personal, folks.  ~Umbran


----------



## Darwinism

Stoutfish said:


> Yes, but you see, your post was quite hostile and would not lead to any logical discussion.  It's quite ironic that your intentions are really no better then justifying rape like you so mentioned.




Are you honestly equating being snarky to being just as bad as justifying rape?

Wow.


----------



## Hunter99

A responsible decision on the part of Enworld moderators.

Anyone who tries to justify rape is a very bad man and should be censured.


----------



## Ettin

Hunter99 said:


> A responsible decision on the part of Enworld moderators.
> 
> Anyone who tries to justify rape is a very bad man and should be censured.




On that note, could you please change your status?


----------



## Killer GM

Hunter99 said:


> A responsible decision on the part of Enworld moderators.
> 
> Anyone who tries to justify rape is a very bad man and should be censured.



...wow. Just, wow.


----------



## Scott DeWar

I personally think this thread needs to be locked. A decision has been made. No more discussion needed.


----------



## Raven Crowking

Piratecat said:


> In the recent event a discussion about in-game rape occurred under very congenial "I abhor this in real life but it occurs in my game world" discussion, and it very understandably made a lot of people furious. That's a problem in part because the moderators, quite correctly following our rules, moderated the people who lost their temper and not the polite person who brought up the subject regarding his game. 'Cause hey, using babies as human shields is truly repugnant too, but a thread where bad guys in a game do this won't even raise an eyebrow; shouldn't a discussion of in-game rape be treated the same way?
> 
> We've decided, quite correctly, not a friggin' chance.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> So we apologize
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Questions?




Yes.

If EN World recognizes that mistakes were made, kudos to you.

I assume, then, that those who should have been moderated will now be dealt with appropriately, and that those who were inappropriately moderated -- and, perhaps, banned from the site as a result -- will receive an apology and an invitation back?

Because, if not, it isn't the decision you are trying to undo; it is the consequence of the decision.  And if it is only the consequence of the decision you are trying to undo, I don't believe that is acceptable.

Obviously, I am only asking in a general sense.  I am not asking you to comment on any specific moderation.  But if _*anyone*_ remains banned for trying to bring the site owner & staff to come to the conclusion that you seem to have here, I cannot in good conscious remain associated with EN World.

A great nation is like a great man:
When he makes a mistake, he realizes it.
Having realized it, he admits it.
Having admitted it, he corrects it.
He considers those who point out his faults as his most benevolent teachers.

-- Lao Tzu​
Time to decide how great, or how petty, EN World is to be.


RC


EDIT:  "Silence also speaks"


----------



## jdrakeh

Raven Crowking said:


> But if _*anyone*_ remains banned for trying to bring the site owner & staff to come to the conclusion that you seem to have here, I cannot in good conscious remain associated with EN World.




You mean _*anyone*_ including those people who spearheaded a cross-forum trolling expedition? Yeah, I can't see _any_ reason why those people should be allowed back. And speaking of "petty" - your attempt to force the hand of moderation? _Petty_.


----------



## Plane Sailing

Piratecat said:


> We're not going to debate this, guys. It's not going to impact 99% of people on this site, mostly because they're already wise enough to use good common sense when posting. And it's okay if you disagree with me, but it isn't optional.




As Piratecat says, we are not going to debate this; it appears that leaving this thread open is seen as an encouragement of debate, so I'm closing it. 

Thanks.


----------



## Piratecat

Hunter99 said:


> A responsible decision on the part of Enworld moderators.
> 
> Anyone who tries to justify rape is a very bad man and should be censured.



Agreed. Under the theory "don't moderate when furious," I've waited a week before addressing individuals from this debacle. Wow, posting this was bad judgment.


----------

