Notice Rule #4 adjustment (Minimum age of characters in adult situations).

[Solo]

So just to confirm. I have a short story where the characters are 15 and there's some crazy stuff happening in the town they live in. But none of them are in sexual situation. That is okay?

Yes, as long as it doesn't break the other parts of Rule #4.

4a. No major abuse or actions may take place toward a character younger than 15. Beyond sexual acts, this means that you may not expound upon abuse, be it mental or physical, toward a pre-15 within your story. Live birthing cannot be of a sexual nature, deriving pleasure, or causing any form of abuse, pain, or harm. This is an adult writing site and stories should not include such serious acts toward or from pre-15 characters. One may include minor wrongdoing type of acts, such as shoplifting, sneaking beers & smokes and the like, typical for teenage rebellion, but major offenses and abuse that are violent and torturous toward pre-15 characters is not to be included in writing or backstory.

When this age adjustment comes into place, 15 will be replaced by 16 in all contexts.

 

[Taboogirl]

Changing it to 16 does a few things

1 - it makes our telegraphing checks easier to explain and enforce
2 - it normalizes the site rules with Elliquiy
3 - it matches common 'age of consent' laws which make people more comfortable

The main thing is I have seen people using 15 year olds to telegraph pedophilia and we do need to put the drop on that.

Seems like a reasonable, well-thought-out perspective. Thanks for clarifying for people who might have been wondering about the specific thought process behind the decision.

The real issue tsukasa seems to have is that this sets a 'precedent' for staff to change rules on a whim.

It's not like this is the first time rules have changed, you know? If rules being changed is a problem, then maybe this is just not the place for you. People have already raised the opinion that it's annoying to retcon and change roleplays, but oh well, what'll you do?

It's not "authoritarian", or "draconian" or any other similar word used to describe over-reaching control over others. I also don't believe in the notion that it's a slippery slope. It just isn't.

And I agree that slippery slope logic isn't something that has an empirical basis for genuine concern, though I do understand the emotional reaction to fearing that kind of perceived outcome.

 

[Lord DreamCrusher]

Changing it to 16 does a few things

1 - it makes our telegraphing checks easier to explain and enforce
2 - it normalizes the site rules with Elliquiy
3 - it matches common 'age of consent' laws which make people more comfortable

The main thing is I have seen people using 15 year olds to telegraph pedophilia and we do need to put the drop on that.

Point 1: As I'm not a moderator I have no comment on this. I'll take your word on it.

Point 2: Bluemoon is a different site than Elliquiy and thus should not be beholden to the same set of rules as an excuse for a change like this in my opinion.

Point 3: Age of consent varies wildly from country to country and, while I admit that 16+ is more common in the world, some quick math tells me that 37% of the world has age of consent at 15 or less which is still a sizeable chunk. Furthermore the argument about making people more comfortable is something of a fallacy. For everyone that is happy about this change there are likely just as many people being made unhappy by it, whether they are vocal in this thread or not.

Your personal statement regarding people using 15 year olds to telegraph pedophilia is also not exactly a proper explanation either. Logic would dictate that these same types of people would just start using 16 year olds in search for the same thing according to the very same logic that has been thrown around in this thread thus far in that "16 is fundamentally no different than 15". At this point the problem repeats itself and you either do what tsukasa fears and up the age limit again or do what else?

This isn't even bringing up the issues that arise in regards to historical roleplays in which marriage ages were lower, or fantasy/sci-fi games in which different species might end up having wildly different lifespans. Fetishized or not, some people are sticklers for accuracy in their roleplaying which is now even harder to achieve. Of course I don't condone such things in reality but writing is not reality, it is fiction and for many a form of escapism.

 

[Sanoci]

That is a good question above..what if it's nonsexual as we have a section specfically for that. Have not fathom that bit as back when the other age stuff was changed that section didn't exist.

 

[Solo]

That is a good question above..what if it's nonsexual as we have a section specfically for that. Have not fathom that bit as back when the other age stuff was changed that section didn't exist.

Nonsexual RP is still subject to Site Rules. The only one I can see it having an effect on is a subsection of Rule 4 involving underage characters:

4a. No major abuse or actions may take place toward a character younger than 15. Beyond sexual acts, this means that you may not expound upon abuse, be it mental or physical, toward a pre-15 within your story. Live birthing cannot be of a sexual nature, deriving pleasure, or causing any form of abuse, pain, or harm. This is an adult writing site and stories should not include such serious acts toward or from pre-15 characters. One may include minor wrongdoing type of acts, such as shoplifting, sneaking beers & smokes and the like, typical for teenage rebellion, but major offenses and abuse that are violent and torturous toward pre-15 characters is not to be included in writing or backstory.

As long as the RP still follows these guidelines, it is fine.

 

[tsukasa]

And I agree that slippery slope logic isn't something that has an empirical basis for genuine concern, though I do understand the emotional reaction to fearing that kind of perceived outcome.

It's far from emotional when the "slippery slope" has happened in front of my eyes on no less than 20 occasions across the internet since I started roleplaying years ago. This is how it always starts. I want to believe it doesn't always end that way, but I'm well beyond the point of pretending it won't.

In real life, it's even worse.

 

[tsukasa]

Furthermore the argument about making people more comfortable is something of a fallacy.

Precisely. No matter what you do, someone will always complain. That's why this makes zero sense.

I don't like specific knives in murder plots, so can we ban machetes? I only want the cool knives. You're banning 15-years-old for ages, so I get to choose a specificity to ban, right?

 

[Pontiff]

Precisely. No matter what you do, someone will always complain. That's why this makes zero sense.

I don't like specific knives in murder plots, so can we ban machetes? I only want the cool knives. You're banning 15-years-old for ages, so I get to choose a specificity to ban, right?

You don't run the site, so no. Get over it. It really seems hard to grasp that you have no say over how someone else runs their site and you can continue to bitch and moan but nothing will change.

Go make your own site and do whatever you want.

 

[Krasnaya]

Furthermore the argument about making people more comfortable is something of a fallacy. For everyone that is happy about this change there are likely just as many people being made unhappy by it, whether they are vocal in this thread or not.

I am pretty sure a lot of people are more uncomfortable with characters being below 18, let alone 16. At least from what I've seen and personally have spoken with few people, as I even heard people refer to individuals below 18 as children, not even teenagers. So I don't think the admins were making shit up when they stated that.

Your personal statement regarding people using 15 year olds to telegraph pedophilia is also not exactly a proper explanation either. Logic would dictate that these same types of people would just start using 16 year olds in search for the same thing according to the very same logic that has been thrown around in this thread thus far in that "16 is fundamentally no different than 15". At this point the problem repeats itself and you either do what tsukasa fears and up the age limit again or do what else?

The difference is that law recognizes starting from 16 year old are individuals who are able to consent (the earliest age) while anything below it you'll be meeting Chris Hansen. Anyone can argue about site rules, but even the site can't argue with law.

 

[Taboogirl]

It's far from emotional when the "slippery slope" has happened in front of my eyes on no less than 20 occasions across the internet since I started roleplaying years ago. This is how it always starts. I want to believe it doesn't always end that way, but I'm well beyond the point of pretending it won't.

In real life, it's even worse.

I don't at all doubt your experience Tsukasa, I'm not at all questioning the reason you feel that this could lead to something that you have seen before. But seeing something before does not inherently mean it will happen again, though I really don't think your frustration and concern are unfounded based on your personal experience. That said there are many examples where the slippery slope does not lead to some kind of absolute authoritarian takeover or censorship, every society has rules and the presence of additional rules does equate to abuse of power. When I say It's an emotional response I'm talking about how your personal experience is influencing your perspective on this particular case, which is literally an emotional and not empirical perspective. I'm also not insulting you for having a personal opinion on the matter, I can see your perspective, I'm just attempting to point out that your perspective isn't a truism.

 

[Anara]

Yes, as long as it doesn't break the other parts of Rule #4.

When this age adjustment comes into place, 15 will be replaced by 16 in all contexts.

Thanks Solo, sounds reasonable to me ^^

 

[Rising Of The Moon]

Neither of you are bringing anything new or helpful to the discussion at the moment. If you can't bring a new arguement in a civil way, consider silence.

 

[Solo]

Another reminder that posts in this thread need to contribute to the conversation and remain civil. Administration would like to leave this open but if it keeps being derailed it will not be productive to leave it this way.

 

[raison detre]

Seems communication has broken down lol.

 

[tsukasa]

Another reminder that posts in this thread need to contribute to the conversation and remain civil. Administration would like to leave this open but if it keeps being derailed it will not be productive to leave it this way.

Why leave it open, anyway? You're not going to change anything. Our opinions mean nothing. Your site would do well without any of us here, wouldn't it?

 

[Krasnaya]

Why leave it open, anyway? You're not going to change anything. Our opinions mean nothing. Your site would do well without any of us here, wouldn't it?

The court of public opinion does not agree with you, even then it wouldn't change anything.

 

[Rising Of The Moon]

Nor are you making things easier for anyone who might try to argue against this in a calm and civil manner.

 

[Light-Fox]

Changing it to 16 does a few things

1 - it makes our telegraphing checks easier to explain and enforce
2 - it normalizes the site rules with Elliquiy
3 - it matches common 'age of consent' laws which make people more comfortable

The main thing is I have seen people using 15 year olds to telegraph pedophilia and we do need to put the drop on that.

People think that about 15 now, they will think it about 16 or 17 later. That's been made abundantly clear by the people calling for 18 in this thread. This decision doesn't protect from sexual predators. It further restricts people's freedom from writing what they want, whatever the reason, because other people are not comfortable with it personally. This won't stop actual pedophiles from seeking out victims to prey on. It just takes from those who are already functioning under reasonable restrictions to appease others. Writing fiction isn't real. All this does is fuel the thought crime crowd and appease those who want to control others. If another site can pass an FBI investigation with less restrictions, then BMR isn't in any danger. My stories include a variety of themes, including underage if applicable, but this restriction makes me uncomfortable writing any kind of story here. Even the nonsexual kind. This change is indicative of a toxic, authoritarian, potentially dangerous trend in the culture of not only this site's community of writers, but that of the larger culture physically around each individual member.

I'll now await the mocking, veiled ad hominems, and gaslighting that I've seen from those who support the decision and are calling for 18 being the limit as I have seen so far.

 

[DarkDreamer9110]

Why leave it open, anyway? You're not going to change anything. Our opinions mean nothing. Your site would do well without any of us here, wouldn't it?

Because they've established this isn't a thread to debate keeping the rules change or not. That decision has been made. This thread exists for discussion about the impending inevitable change. But you and several other people are trying to make a number of at best unfounded and at worst totally BS arguments about censorship and authoritarianism because you feel your free speech has been infringed upon. I would love to see you scream "Fire!" In a crowded theater and then complain when you face consequences for that.

 

[Solo]

Why leave it open, anyway? You're not going to change anything. Our opinions mean nothing. Your site would do well without any of us here, wouldn't it?

For people to be able to give their opinions and ask questions in a constructive way, as many members have continued to do since the thread was posted.

If members would like to leave over us raising the age limit one year, that is their prerogative. We don't want anyone to leave, but this is a choice that we have made as a collaborative, volunteer staff under the agreement of the site owner. We posted this thread for full transparency, and to allow members to get to know why we chose to do this and how we will handle it going forward. If you or anyone else does not want to take our words for it, that's your decision and you're able to feel that way.

 

[tsukasa]

The court of public opinion does not agree with you, even then it wouldn't change anything.

It's clear by reading this that 2 things are apparent:

1. The initial post said our voices can be heard
2. Around half of the members here either oppose this change or are indifferent about it

No poll has been held, so what's the point? So they can laugh at people who disagree? If it's not democracy, your voice is a waste of oxygen, or energy wasted on typing. What does anyone gain when they've made it clear our voices will be heard but not acted upon? That's not voices being heard, it's pretending to care.

 

[Sanoci]

People think that about 15 now, they will think it about 16 or 17 later. That's been made abundantly clear by the people calling for 18 in this thread. This decision doesn't protect from sexual predators. It further restricts people's freedom from writing what they want, whatever the reason, because other people are not comfortable with it personally. This won't stop actual pedophiles from seeking out victims to prey on. It just takes from those who are already functioning under reasonable restrictions to appease others. Writing fiction isn't real. All this does is fuel the thought crime crowd and appease those who want to control others. If another site can pass an FBI investigation with less restrictions, then BMR isn't in any danger. My stories include a variety of themes, including underage if applicable, but this restriction makes me uncomfortable writing any kind of story here. Even the nonsexual kind. This change is indicative of a toxic, authoritarian, potentially dangerous trend in the culture of not only this site's community of writers, but that of the larger culture physically around each individual member.

I'll now await the mocking, veiled ad hominems, and gaslighting that I've seen from those who support the decision and are calling for 18 being the limit as I have seen so far.

While I do not wholeheartedly agree..I can say as someone who remembers the old day of the site and more importantly the internet...you're not wrong to feel threatened by the thought of that future.

One can only hope what is being stated is true to their word

 

[Saber]

People think that about 15 now, they will think it about 16 or 17 later. That's been made abundantly clear by the people calling for 18 in this thread. This decision doesn't protect from sexual predators. It further restricts people's freedom from writing what they want, whatever the reason, because other people are not comfortable with it personally. This won't stop actual pedophiles from seeking out victims to prey on. It just takes from those who are already functioning under reasonable restrictions to appease others. Writing fiction isn't real. All this does is fuel the thought crime crowd and appease those who want to control others. If another site can pass an FBI investigation with less restrictions, then BMR isn't in any danger. My stories include a variety of themes, including underage if applicable, but this restriction makes me uncomfortable writing any kind of story here. Even the nonsexual kind. This change is indicative of a toxic, authoritarian, potentially dangerous trend in the culture of not only this site's community of writers, but that of the larger culture physically around each individual member.

I'll now await the mocking, veiled ad hominems, and gaslighting that I've seen from those who support the decision and are calling for 18 being the limit as I have seen so far.

This was a reply as to some of the reasoning behind the change because someone asked/suggested politely. We are aware it's not fool proof and we don't expect it to be.

 

[Arclight1988]

I can understand being upset about a rule change that effects you specifically, yet if your bigger concern is further blocks and other barricades to your freedom of writing that is probably why they specifically added there would be no more changes.

So to alleviate that fear could anyone from staff confirm what it would take for any other act/behavior to get put on the banned from site list? What if a new staff member joined in the future and advocates against any degradation as it promotes other insensitivities how would that be handled if not too much trouble.

This rule change is better to my comfort level of such things. However I can at least understand that to some people it will cut realism away...

 

[Krasnaya]

No poll has been held, so what's the point? So they can laugh at people who disagree? If it's not democracy, your voice is a waste of oxygen, or energy wasted on typing. What does anyone gain when they've made it clear our voices will be heard but not acted upon? That's not voices being heard, it's pretending to care.

From what I've gathered, a lot would agree on raising the character age limit. It's not like a lot has changed anyway. It's literally a year and it also abides the law. You still get your high-school experience and anything you'd do wouldn't be considered as CP in the court of law, regardless if its fictional writing. I doubt you wouldn't be getting weird looks if it would come out you wrote 15 year olds in erotic situations as an adult.