What Defines Trolling or Harassment On Wurm Online?

[Blazecraze 440]

Hey all,

 

I am posting this in woodscraps because although it is entirely about wurm and communication and socializing on Wurm, it'd be moved here anyway. This is more of a discussion on the core rules of the game that are easily taken out of context, are too broad to be super agreeable and are the bane of a multicultural platform such as our own. This probably goes against the rules of the forums itself, I mean it doesn't when I review the rules but as we'll see below if the thread is closed. I made sure to read over them extensively to avoid trolling any players, there's no intent to cause a negative reaction, there is no doxxing or name calling, purely a discussion on these rules and a look for some feedback from those that often find themselves in the three positions. 1. The person submitting a ticket or contacting staff for these rule violations. 2. The staff handling the situation (Although you cannot discuss personal cases, which is understandable, a broad statement on how you tackle each ruling would be lovely. Theres so many different staff and you all interpret these rules vastly differently.) and 3. Those that have been slapped for one of these violations, whether its true or not, and what your take on these rules are. A bonus 4th for anyone that would just like to chime in with their take on the broadness of these rulings would be fine too.

I will start off with a small comment about the game also. Wurm went through a drastically toxic period of time last year, with a few well known names, some banned, some now inactive, going out of their way to bully staff, bully other players, manipulate players and threaten players both on and off the platform. I endorse none of these actions, in fact, you will often find me in global chat speaking against those that bully staff, but also just as importantly, speaking up when I feel staff have taken it too far in a ruling. Even if it'll get me banned one day for challenging moderation. The absolute broadness the following things allow situations where people can break rules without even meaning to, people can use the broadness of rules to send punishment down on others, and those that wish to hurt others can find an easy time slinking in and out, toeing the line as they please. 
 

As per the game rules, trolling is defined by the following;

Trolling

Definition: Inflammatory or off-topic messages intended to provoke other members into a desired emotional response or to otherwise disrupt chat.

A ) You may not post to purposely disrupt chat in any way or by using such actions as excessive trolling or derailing.

- Excessive is defined as more than one instance in a short period of time, or in such a way to be annoying to most players.

B ) You may not post with the sole intent of upsetting other players or staff, or to cause unrest.

C ) You may not post excessive shouting(caps) or Ascii art.

D ) Do not post to defame or discredit Code Club AB, its products, developers, or Wurm Online team members.

 

Harassment is defined by the following;

 

Harassment
Definition: Systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions, including threats and demands.

A ) You may not harass (sexually or otherwise), verbally abuse, threaten, berate, flame, or cause unwanted distress to anyone.

 

If you were to look over the rulings above - you will see points that at first glance, give you a direct and easy guideline: Do not purposefully do anything to upset other players - do not spam in capitals, do not insult staff or the company. Keep any and all sexual comments to yourself, do not threaten or target other players.
Those guidelines are pretty easy to follow - however, once you start interacting on the game, this is where it gets tricky. 

 

Point A, for example, is so broad that its entirely plausible that anytime someone attempts to change a topic (someone outside of staff, of course, its their job to move topics on if they subjectively, by their own will, feel the conversation shouldn't be there - which is a problem in itself, but that can't be discussed in any format as it violates rule D, which in its own a drastically ridiculous concept.) that they are trolling, by purposely disrupting the chat or attempting to derail it. If three people are discussing their favourite colour, and someone pipes up with "This is Wurm chat, talk about Wurm." then by this own definition, this person is trolling. Not only is that a little ridiculous, both the person expecting Wurm only conversation, but because someone wishing the chat should move on doesn't mean they intend to cause offense or are attempting to harass the players actively in the conversation. A player who posts something as simple as 'I kind of think this topic is not fit for Wurm' is also disrupting and attempting to derail the conversation, no matter how considerate they are of other peoples feelings. Logically, you would not punish that person if you were looking at it - but there'd be a case that this player is indeed, trolling the conversation. By the rules, they are. 

Trolling in most broad attempt at explaining it, is actively going out of your way to cause a negative reaction from the subject you are trolling. Off topic messages by the games description. during a conversation, are trolling. I think literally everyone in the game that has ever spoken in GL is a troll, by Wurms defined standard. People are talking about their favourite food, someone pipes up 'Pizza is the best food, I think.' and another user yells out. "Pizza is trash!' - no-one would ever actually take offense to that, but the person trying to confirm that pizza is indeed not the best food has spoken in such a way that you could form a case against them. Personally I wouldn't, but ive seen it happen, we all have. This also means that players who are excited to discuss something and derail the conversation to what they want to talk about, are trolling. Players who want to add a joke in that directs the conversation elsewhere are trolling...now, of course you will look at the rule and point out that it says 'intended to provoke other members into a desired emotional response.' and that is where a lot of this gets sticky. Intentions are hard to see when you're online, and Wurm is a rather personal game, people put their heart and soul on the line at times - and honestly, the amount of times people decide others intentions for them is ridiculously large. So besides players being judge, jury and executioners of peoples intention behind their actions, the major rule break here really comes from 'to otherwise disrupt chat'. Some players may feel a change of chat is in order and don't find that abrupt interruption as disrupting, but a welcome change - others won't - some won't care, generally no-one cares, its a free flowing system - but when someone cares enough to complain, or someone watching takes the broad stance and thinks its worth punishing, then we have the odd situations that I am here to ask about. I want to know peoples opinions and meters on where disrupting chat actually lies. At what point is something disruptive, at what point is it just a change of topic, at what point is it the general flow of conversation elsewhere? For those that have been in any of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or just a bonus 4th position, where do you draw the line and has it been changed due to interactions on the game? Personally, I feel chat is free flowing and if someone changes my conversation about the glory of bricks, to todays news event, or to a natural disaster going on somewhere else in the world, I am okay with that. I've never been warned or muted personally for 'disrupting chat' outside of a few times where we were posting our favourite song lyrics and it was deemed as 'spamming' for the two lines that were posted.

 

Point B ties directly into Point A in many different ways, including the fact that the intent to upset is nearly never present when a player is upset. Examples are seen in the chat channels of this game daily, such as someone being upset when someone else uses a curse word, despite the game coming under T for Teen, or PG13 if you were to compare it to most other games rating by the standard rating systems across the gaming world. Mainly due to its violence with combat and its ability to engage in player vs player battles using swords and resulting in a player death. Also now that Wurm meets steam guidelines, the youngest age to subscribe for a steam account is 13 also. Wurm of course, has attempted, attempted being a big key word due its older playerbase, to make the game child friendly. That is up to the parents to handle the content their children can see of course. The game also includes a language filter, to help those that couldn't bare witness to a curse word avoid this - yet, a player will still be punished, or warned and forced to avoid it by a member of staff, even though the content rules do not state that using a curse word is against the rules. In fact, the entirety of Content Point A is already rather crazy.

Content

A ) You may not use sexually explicit, harmful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive language.

 - This includes workarounds, symbols, links, misspelling, and text within images.

 

This is a point that I can't wrap my head around at times, and its a point I've discussed before with a varied group of players. These words are almost entirely subjective and depending on your cultural background, will change your opinion on this. What is sexually explicit? Well, that one is super simple, thankfully...on the surface. Keep the discussion of the sexual organs out of the game, do not speak of anyone sexually - its not hard to grasp....unless, you have maybe, been brought up in the US, the UK, Australia etc - where certain words are engrained into your vocabulary, joking about someone like that is not deemed explicit...or maybe in some places across the world where nudity is not considered obscene or explicit - I think most of us have seen a piece or two from the French film festival growing up. The mentioning of  certain things, because it is a global game from different cultures and what may be defamatory in one area is harmless in another, makes drawing the line at explicit really hard. The definition of explicit being - 'Stated clearly and in detail.'  The best example of how this rule is so often utilized in an astound broad sense is the use of the term Bugger, as it does in the game also, that happens to have a rather not safe for work variation of the word in one of the cultures that a portion of players belong to. To some, Bugger is an explicit term, people may report you for saying it, people may utilize the block feature because they think you're vulgar, others may ignore it because its minor - however, the word carries two definitions - one utilized by a section of the world to describe something tough, hard to budge, challenging - another, as something that is very much so, obscene and sexually explicit. Here, I ask, is where do most of you draw the line between something that is a passing mention of an organ, compared to something that is sexually explicit. Personally, a mention of the organs found on the chest is not explicit, however if you were to start to go into detail over them, or make comments about someone elses, then you've not even toed the line, you've directly crossed it. What is everyone elses thoughts? Personally ive seen plenty of complaints from people in group 3 that have complained because of the word Boob and Breast. The context, again going back to how broad these rules are, ignored even whether they were talking about chicken or a female.

 

Harmful, Threatening, Abusive, Obscene and Hateful are all in situations such as the one above. What is harmful? Telling someone to eat a pizza for dinner, or order takeway can be harmful, afterall, its unsolicited health advice delivered from a non professional...or, its a friendly suggestion for dinner tonight. Threatning can be seen in many ways too. "Hey, if I see you on Chaos, your affinities are mine." - this could either be seen as an in game threat you will kill a player in the PvP section, or it could be seen as a targeted attack. Personally ive been on the recieving end of this a lot but never once have I thought "Oh, that is not allowed, I don't want to go there anymore because I will be killed." partially because, you know, its a part of the game. Of course, if the threats are off the game, then thats something entirely different - but these threats are also seen in other places. I've seen a multitude of 'I dare you to break the rules' from staff, ive seen others that say 'I want you to mess with my perimeter, so I can report you.' when dealing with land feuds. These are in game threats that are quite clearly against the rules, but where does one stand on these? I am interested in these ones most of all. At what point does provoking someone to get a response, then having them punished for their response, not include trolling? At what point is it no longer just provocation, but actually harassment? What are everyone's opinions on this? 

Defamatory, Racially or ethnically offensive language are black and white. Intent aside, if you say something racist, sexist or that is entirely untrue, there is no debate. Yes, intention is important, and I think punishment should not be handed out if the comment has come from ignorance in the regard that the player was not aware of the connotation behind a word -  especially when we are working with a globally inclusive game, however once you are aware of your ignorance, there are no excuses. Everyone can be the victim of sexism or racism, regardless of your gender, sex or cultural background.

 

Continuing on the Trolling rule points;

 

Point C) is pretty straight forward. You can throw a full cap sentence in the chat now and then, sometimes its humorous, not really much to talk about here. In fact, you can't take this one out of context at all. See multiple lines, thats that. Everyone can agree on that one.

Point D) Pretty simple to understand, I mean we can't even discuss this point due to the existence of this point, and the terming is so broad that even if you were in an argument with a member of staff and you were to both call each other an idiot, this point can be dropped on your head.

 

Continuing on to harassment;

Systematic or continued. This is one that I have thought about for a long time. Personally, I have been involved in plenty of land dramas for a long time over my 12+ years of playing Wurm. I've had my lands hunted, my perimiters sanded, deeds made to block to me in - and I have done it all back in return - over the many years I have played. A lot of this has happened during the earlier years of Indy, but also during the sprouting years of Deli and so on. When players compete for land, compete for resources - overall go out of their way to  prevent others from enjoying their time on wurm, that is obviously, targeted harassment, one would think...but what about when its not? What about when these situations extend into years, staff start their time and finish their time on Wurm before a matters settled, years of context get lost - but one thing remains - two or more players actively fighting against each other. Is it deemed a spat? Are both harassing others? Just each other?  Do we hunt through the thousands of tickets and logs over the years to find the very first to find who complained first? How is harassment when multiple players are involved and have acted against each other, defined by the general population of the game? There are obvious examples, we've seen them through the past year. Players only speaking in Freedom chat to insult another player, players doing the same in GL - players attacking other players and staff off the platform - but what about the less obvious ones? Finally for this one, I have 'unwanted distress'. How is distress even described? You can cause distress to someone just by sharing a different opinion, whether you two argue or not - you can cause distress to someone by wishing to deed nearby them, even if you don't know them, because they wish to have an excluded deed by themselves. What about the highway systems that are continually expanded to reach deeds of players that do not wish to be on the highway? That causes unwanted distress, but at what point is connecting the community by a highway more important than their wishes not to have a highway within their local? Deed it or lose it, some may say, its not on deed so you can't complain, others will say - but what about their natural landscape thats just been shaved to put in a cobblestone road thats now protected by the game rules purely because someone didn't like the alternate route and wanted a different path? Whats everyones thoughts on how distress can even be measured, and when distress is even a rational response to what is happening?

Personally, again, I want to know peoples experiences (no names, please.) stories, their thoughts and opinions -  I want to know how they have handled these situations, what they've thought of the handling of these situations and what they think about when they are the ones to ask for help in these situations. Remember that everyone here comes from different portions of the world, we're all different ages and we all share different experiences. The only experience in Wurm that everyone has shared is logging in for the first time. One of the things id like to come from this thread, if it isn't instantly closed or filled with flaming, is to see where exactly wurmians stand on these specific things, where the lines are drawn in the sand, where the outliers exist - and most of all - where we can find just and unjust punishment, whether that be staff or community punishment.

 

Pst my formatting sucks because I don't use forums often and this type of thing confuses me. I have no clue how to get rid of the white parts after I copy pasted the rule sections because I am not that smart a man. 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2021 by Blazecraze

[Tpikol 1,057]

you really need to separate what you are quoting from what you are writing. to make it easy you can just press enter a few times to make some empty lines below the quotes before you copy them and use those empty lines below to keep writing.

 

my opinion as someone who has both been a chat moderator and a forum moderator, has received forum warnings for staff bashing and trolling and has been accused of all kinds of insane things  is that you should focus less on how the rules could possibly be used if they were interpreted in the worst way possible and more on how they are actually used.

Edited September 19, 2021 by Tpikol

[Skatyna 432]

1 hour ago, Tpikol said:

you really need to separate what you are quoting from what you are writing. to make it easy you can just press enter a few times to make some empty lines below the quotes before you copy them and use those empty lines below to keep writing.

 

my opinion as someone who has both been a chat moderator and a forum moderator, has received forum warnings for staff bashing and trolling and has been accused of all kinds of insane things  is that you should focus less on how the rules could possibly be used if they were interpreted in the worst way possible and more on how they are actually used.

 

Its all just a joke imo. Try to be a bit sceptical about wurm staff or simply express your opinion about stuff related to them - you are bashing them. Try to be a bit funny in a random post - you get warned for trolling. 'Freedom of free speech' goes down the drain in wurm, as anything some snowflakes wont like - you get penalised as they can interpret the rules the way they would suit them lol

Edited September 19, 2021 by Skatyna

[Pandalet 1,848]

As has been said, it's easy to focus on the worst possible interpretation of how the rules might be applied.  The rules are (mostly) non-specific by design, as we expect all our moderators to apply judgement in every situation; the alternative would be a massive mess of really specific rules that would never cover every possible eventuality, would be a nightmare to read or maintain, and the people whose behaviour they're designed to prevent would be constantly picking loopholes anyway.  To deal with the fact that sometimes interpretations of exactly how a rule applies or not may be subjective, every moderation team has an appeal and review process.  In general, if a moderation action is unclear or you feel it's unwarranted, you can contact the moderator involved, or you can appeal it to the head of that department - see the Wurm staff post here https://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/4976-wurm-online-staff/ for current leads. 

 

As a general rule, unless your behaviour is completely egregious, you will be first asked to modify your behaviour.  Sometimes people simply didn't see something as offensive, or there are cultural differences, or whatever.  This could be a chat moderator asking for a change in topic, or it could be a PM from a forum moderator.  Formal sanctions generally follow where the behaviour involved is repeated, in spite of moderator involvement, or where reaction to moderation has been combative, offensive, or otherwise obstructive.  If you've been asked not to do something by someone in a position of authority, and you continue to do it, I'm honestly not sure what you expect the result to be, other than formal sanction. 

 

I am not going to get into strawman arguments about ridiculously contrived examples.  Wurm, and its various official associated communications channels, are made available contingent on participants being able to follow the stated rules, or where necessary, to obey moderators' directions (and the vast majority of people using these systems have no problem doing so).  If you are unable or unwilling to do that, then you have no place here - there are, no doubt, plenty of places outside the official Wurm space with policies that would better suit.  Disagreeing with a ruling does not remove the requirement that you follow it.  If you are unsure about something, there are plenty of options to ask someone, and most of them don't involve posting publicly - while staff are not going to get into an endless circular argument about a particular event or point, they should always respond to a polite query (or at least, tell you where the query should be directed to). 

[Yaga 2,887]

Regarding the chat system, this is my favourite rule (the topmost paragraph under "Chat Rules") :

 

Quote

The Wurm Online chat system is provided by Code Club AB with the intent of creating a productive environment for interaction between us and our members. Towards that end we expect you to keep a tone that is civil and respectful as if you were a guest in our office. Participation in the chat system is a privilege, not a right.

 

Says it all! 

 

[HerbalMentat 107]

  

4 hours ago, Skatyna said:

 

Its all just a joke imo. Try to be a bit sceptical about wurm staff or simply express your opinion about stuff related to them - you are bashing them. Try to be a bit funny in a random post - you get warned for trolling. 'Freedom of free speech' goes down the drain in wurm, as anything some snowflakes wont like - you get penalised as they can interpret the rules the way they would suit them lol

 

MY FREEDUMB.

 

jfc.

Edited September 19, 2021 by HerbalMentat

[Nomadikhan 2,196]

Once a long time ago someone was posting on here complaining about how horrible their life was and how it was hard trying to get their "youtube career" going, I replied to the effect of maybe they should grow up and get a real job (in hindsight, because it's always 20/20, it's a viable money maker for talented people) and I was warned that it constituted harrassing.   I'm not arguing the warning, it was trivial, but telling teenagers to grow up and be a productive member of society is not harrassing, it's someone with real life experience telling a drama queen to get over it.   We're all unique, just like everyone else.   But this is the internet, is what it is. 

[CreZ 284]

5 hours ago, Pandalet said:

 In general, if a moderation action is unclear or you feel it's unwarranted, you can contact the moderator involved, or you can appeal it to the head of that department - see the Wurm staff post here https://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/4976-wurm-online-staff/ for current leads. 

Not that empricial evidence would suggest you'll get a response. Not even an automated one...

 

Not that

5 hours ago, Pandalet said:

If you are unable or unwilling to do that, then you have no place here 

 

Staff only WU server, sounds fun. I hope yall enjoy that when you get around to it.

[Minnie 178]

It’s not possible to draw a distinct line in the sand on any of these questions, because language is imprecise.  Any decision as to whether a particular rule has been violated is always going to be subjective, without exception, in Wurm or in any other context.  It’s always going to be possible to make a case on either side, and it’s never going to be possible to say with certainty that one or the other side is in the right.  We have to hope that those who are tasked with adjudicating such matters (not an enviable position, to be sure) take the job seriously and perform it to the utmost of their abilities.  And we have to respect the difficult work these people do, and accept and abide by their rulings even when we disagree with them.

Edited September 19, 2021 by Minnie

[TheTrickster 2,284]

12 hours ago, Pandalet said:

If you are unsure about something, there are plenty of options to ask someone, and most of them don't involve posting publicly - while staff are not going to get into an endless circular argument about a particular event or point, they should always respond to a polite query (or at least, tell you where the query should be directed to). 

That there seems to be where what is intended to be a somewhat two-way street seems to become something else altogether.  I have not had many causes to take a concern to staff (which in itself is a good thing), but I have had a few and of my politely worded private queries only one received any kind of response at all.  The response was respectful, friendly even, but devoid of any real message beyond "Thanks for your message; we know more than you know, but will consider what you have shared."  Apart from that once, I have not even had acknowledgement let alone redirection.  This is what drives people to air their concerns and even complaints publicly - when they perceive no effective private alternative.  An important measure of how well any system is functioning is how it handles things that go wrong.

 

I would expect that where we see the rules, staff would also have access to some uniform guidance on those rules so that while the rules are general the approach is at least as consistent.  I would hope that where application becomes inconsistent, rather than ignoring it or quietly reversing it, senior staff either counsel those "colouring outside the lines" or acknowledge that the lines need to be adjusted a bit.

[Tomatoes 276]

21 hours ago, Blazecraze said:

Even if it'll get me banned one day for challenging moderation.

you NEVER challenge their ruling in PUBLIC!!!. if you have questions or need to challenge a ruling you do it via pm/email. 

the more i read the rest the more i see another individual with social interaction issues in an online place. our hearts go out to you blaze

 

ok, half the reason I decided to just stop earlier is due to my personal 'wall of text' issue. i wont go into anything other then to say your post @Blazecraze was mighty difficult to deal with. the other half of the reason was cause I'm sure you wouldn't actually get it - but ill try. 

Staff don't have to report everything nor would I expect them to - people have a right to privacy you know. safety matters. 

keep in mind that when it comes to the internet, we are basically letting a small part of 'society' in our lives. Individuals protect themselves how they see fit. yes you are going to be interacting with multiple cultures when in Wurm. you have to err on the side of caution when interacting with people sometimes. yes it may be 'imaginary', but that does not mean that the other people playing the game are not real as well. 

when it comes to trolling you are missing a very large piece - not everyone has the best 'emotional control'. in fact some people have trauma that quite literally short them out to the point where they want to die. its not fun, nor pretty to look at. you need your emotional control to survive life. without it you cant drive a car, do grocery shopping, or even hold a job. 'Triggers' are a thing and there are people out there who make it their job to intentionally cause people to lose control. if you are not careful on how you interact with the 'public' you could be mistaken as one.

 

the other part of trolling you are missing is that you need to separate the world of 'Wurm' from real life, and figure out which is going on in chat at the same time.

when it comes to point A on the trolling list, think of it as: don't attack someone's individuality, and you let them talk about their own things unless they give you permission to do so otherwise.
 

most of the rest of your points can be summarized down into one topic - privacy. we are supposed to keep our mouths shut about other peoples business, if we know about it, and the reason is cause everyone deserves to survive, succeed, and stay safe. you are not the only one out there trying to live life and survive it, and there are quite a few of us using Wurm to survive rl. Its not just imagination, and its not JUST a game. keep in mind not everyone is the same, there is SO much variety out there its a bit mindboggling. 

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Tomatoes
actually tried to read blazes post

[Tomatoes 276]

18 hours ago, Skatyna said:

 

Its all just a joke imo. Try to be a bit sceptical about wurm staff or simply express your opinion about stuff related to them - you are bashing them. Try to be a bit funny in a random post - you get warned for trolling. 'Freedom of free speech' goes down the drain in wurm, as anything some snowflakes wont like - you get penalised as they can interpret the rules the way they would suit them lol

'Freedom of Speech' never meant you could say what you want, only that you have the right TO communicate. it is up to you to choose the words you want to use....and what you say matters

it is up to the individual to make sure they are not going to upset another by the words that they use or how they are used. beyond that the only thing an individual can do is be empathetic and apologize if we screw up. 

12 hours ago, CreZ said:

Not that empricial evidence would suggest you'll get a response. Not even an automated one...

 

Not that

 

Staff only WU server, sounds fun. I hope yall enjoy that when you get around to it.

and i will repeat this again to - hopefully - good effect: 


Staff does not have to report everything.

Nor should they have to - People have a right to their privacy

cm/ca/gm staff are here doing ONE thing: enforcing the rules. 

out side that function they are just regular players playing the game. can we treat them like sapient beings rather then some sort of lesser entity, please.

[MrKettle 121]

Realistically it depends on the person who is moderating you, which is a big thing I have noticed in this game, some people will just be like "hey cut it out" and move on where others will be facetious about the situation and say something sarcastic - and like I get it, being a moderator is kind of a thankless job but there's a level of civility that should always be maintained especially if you are in a power position.  I have specific examples but, as you mentioned, some of the rules are vague so I am not sure if bringing it up would get me banned and it's not exactly something I would want to roll the dice on but I can say this much, some mods get more angry than others and handle things in more extreme ways.  I personally had an issue with this  and the way it was handled, at least to me, seemed mildly questionable but I never did anything about it because the fear of being banned for contesting.  However I do wish that there was more consistency with post locking and in game trolling.

[Zahnweh 51]

I loved Wurm once upon a time.  A part of me still feels something for this game, enough to keep coming back, but I have complaints with how it is moderated at times.  Just because someone is in power, they aren't excluded from being questioned and critiqued for their actions.  Especially when the rules are vague enough to be twisted to fit whatever the admin wishes.  So yeah, we can't question them, we can't criticize them, and we're expected to trust in the judgment of admins that use them.  Not all moderators are like that, and I can imagine it is a difficult job, especially for the ones that are volunteering.  I can't help, but feel like I should voice my concerns.  Even if they're unwanted, even if it can be construed as contesting, I feel like I should address my concerns and see if they're valid.  *shrug*  Then again, it'd be a miracle to find chat/forum/MMO rules that didn't have the potential of exploitation and misuse by higher-ups.