Jump to content

A discussion involving Rule 19.


Rhy Rhy

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Midwest said:

Indeed actually it can. In lots of places, if you provide a service which others use, and that service is used as a medium to exploit or otherwise intice minors into sexually explicit activities, responsibility can fall on the company for not having any protections established to prevent said exploitation. Social media and dating services all do this, for that exact reason. 

And this.

Link to comment

Hey. Pulling a machete on a kid who is verballing harassing you is incredibly poor escalation. Especially if your first resort is to pull a machete within six minutes instead of threatening to call the cops, or just leaving. There's so many more options beyond Jason Voorhees Vigilante roleplay.

 

You're allowed to slap a kid upside the head but you're certainly not allowed to pull a fucking sword/knife on a kid unless you're really in that life. Sorry I just don't see a ULSA profressor/business owner/literally any legal roleplay attempting to murder a kid unless they themselves are met with lethality.  And lastly yes - many kids do act wild because they know they won't be tried as an adult, and understand that most of the dumb shit they do as a kid will be wiped from their record, so citing their age as an excuse to get out of trouble is entirely valid. Gangs actually will use kids for many illegal things because  the punishments are vastly different between a minor and an adult, it's why they're referred to as "crash dummies". If a kid punches an adult, juvenile hall for a bit, maybe not even that, life goes on. An adult punches a kid? Felony. 

 

I personally don't see any issues with underage characters being vulgar and talking unpleasantly, but any sort of roleplay that could lead to any sort of relationship between an adult and underage character beyond "friends" is not cool.

 

I think rule 19 needs to be reworded, but personally, if the intent isn't to ERP or initiate a romantic relationship, the sexual verbal harassment is mostly fine. Any talk of intimate behaviors and romantic gestures or intimate physical contact is naturally, disgusting.

 

Kids are going to yell obscenities like "suck my dick" "kiss my ass", it's nothing new. 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Just now, i dont wanna od in LA said:

Re-read my point. Let's say a 15 years old player engages into ERP with a 30 years old player. The 15 years old player states that they're 18 in the OOC chat and then proceed to engage into descriptive erotic roleplay. Who hold the liability? Clearly the platform, because they have not checked the age of player before allowing him to access said content. Banning the ERP would ultimately solve this issue and regardless of the age, people would simply stay out of that kind of roleplay. I really don't get why are you so upset with erotic roleplay being prohibited, but perhaps you really should re-evaluate if GTAW is the right platform to engage into that form of entertainment.

The platform doesn't have to check the age of the individual so much as have them verify they are over a particular age. That detaches legal liability. I'm only remarking on this because of the legal misinterpretations. If you have an example of a platform being held liable, then by all means, cite the case for me.

 

I have no opinion one way or the other on banning ERP altogether, though I wonder if the demographic engaged in ERP might rival the figure you mentioned earlier regarding underage players. Not that we'll get a precise number for either.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Beholder said:

Gangs actually will use kids for many illegal things because  the punishments are vastly different between a minor and an adult, it's why they're referred to as "crash dummies". If a kid punches an adult, juvenile hall for a bit, maybe not even that, life goes on. An adult punches a kid? Felony. 

This is a very good point.  It's realistic portrayal and a good example of RP mirroring RL.

Edited by Taina
Link to comment
1 minute ago, Taina said:

This is a very good point.  It's realistic portrayal and a good example of RP mirroring RL.

If that were how minors were portrayed, sure - but putting aside my qualms with that, I hardly think it's worth the pedophilia wave we've seen, no matter how realistic it is. Banning ERP will push people to other platforms after they meet in game. I prefer we cut out the minors altogether.

Link to comment
Just now, Smilesville said:

If that were how minors were portrayed, sure - but putting aside my qualms with that, I hardly think it's worth the pedophilia wave we've seen, no matter how realistic it is. Banning ERP will push people to other platforms after they meet in game. I prefer we cut out the minors altogether.

Are we talking about minor CHARACTERS or minor players?  Vee and I are referring to minor characters - who often times are played by RL adults.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Smilesville said:

The platform doesn't have to check the age of the individual so much as have them verify they are over a particular age. That detaches legal liability. I'm only remarking on this because of the legal misinterpretations. If you have an example of a platform being held liable, then by all means, cite the case for me.

 

I have no opinion one way or the other on banning ERP altogether, though I wonder if the demographic engaged in ERP might rival the figure you mentioned earlier regarding underage players. Not that we'll get a precise number for either.

What I was trying to say is multiple EU laws cover is. There's an EU legislation which multiple EU countries have signed and it explicitly states that
"Each Party shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to criminalise the intentional causing, for sexual purposes, of a child who has not reached the age set in application of Article 18, paragraph 2, to witness sexual abuse or sexual activities, even without having to participate."
What does that mean in practice? Well, the server would have to prepare a separate TOS for every country in the EU to make sure that each individual player coming from a different place is upheld to the same standards of not being a part of any sexual activities or even WITNESSING any sexual activities. Does that mean that GTAW can be potentially in danger? Not really, no. Obviously they wouldn't be held liable for it, however the issue with OOC predators is really huge here. Just last week there was a sexual predator (and particularly a pedophile banned from the server. Prohibition of explicit sexual roleplay would simply ensure that no minors can be exposed to sexual roleplay in any way possible. Fade to black is perfectly fine because it cannot be deemed as sexual material, since it's not descriptive at all. And that's all it takes to protect the underage players from predators & potentially save the server from problems at one point in the time.

Link to comment
Just now, Taina said:

Are we talking about minor CHARACTERS or minor players?  Vee and I are referring to minor characters - who often times are played by RL adults.

Either. Doesn't matter to me whether the character or the player is under 18 - either is gross.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Smilesville said:

If that were how minors were portrayed, sure - but putting aside my qualms with that, I hardly think it's worth the pedophilia wave we've seen, no matter how realistic it is. Banning ERP will push people to other platforms after they meet in game. I prefer we cut out the minors altogether.

Problem is that you can't just ban all underage players from the server, because that would mean a loss of at least of 50% of the playerbase. Removing underage CHARACTERS wouldn't solve the issue either, because if they were ERPing as 18yo+ characters would still mean that they're exposed to explicit sexual material as minors IRL and the issue of IRL predatory and legal problems would still remain unsolved.

Edited by i dont wanna od in LA
Link to comment
  • Storm locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
  • Create New...