Quote from: jhkim;1090799By his own account, the GM had the characters all roofied, waking up naked and handcuffed with their assholes sore - with no explanation given. He claims that their asses being sore was from diarrhea, but he gave no clue of that to the players. Even if the victim isn't penetrated - if a criminal knocks them out, strips them naked, and handcuffs them to others - that's likely to be considered sexual abuse.

Perhaps, but many people, myself included, are/were under the impression that rape was explicit, and not inferred.
In my opinion, that does change the equation to some degree. Perhaps the GM is trying to cover his tracks, perhaps he did want them to infer sexual abuse. But the horror genre does often contain sexual undertones and overtones. A monster face-raping people and impregnating them, for example.
But perhaps the GM did honestly not intend the players to infer sexual assault. How can we determine? Again, in my opinion, this situation has become a lot more murky than if some meathead had an explicit moment in their game where they said "You got raped!"

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1090800Perhaps, but many people, myself included, are/were under the impression that rape was explicit, and not inferred.
In my opinion, that does change the equation to some degree. Perhaps the GM is trying to cover his tracks, perhaps he did want them to infer sexual abuse. But the horror genre does often contain sexual undertones and overtones. A monster face-raping people and impregnating them, for example.
But perhaps the GM did honestly not intend the players to infer sexual assault. How can we determine? Again, in my opinion, this situation has become a lot more murky than if some meathead had an explicit moment in their game where they said "You got raped!"

I don't think that implied rape when someone was unconscious and powerless is necessarily better than an explicit statement of "You got raped." Neither of them are actual violence, but it's not something to spring on players who aren't prepared for it.

I agree that rape and/or sexual overtones can be a part of horror. i.e. Rosemary's Baby, etc.  My previous games of Bluebeard's Bride included sexual violence.  But players knew what they were getting into.  I don't think that a generic "18+" or description that things could get "messy" is sufficient to cover this.

Quote from: jhkim;1090807I don't think that implied rape when someone was unconscious and powerless is necessarily better than an explicit statement of "You got raped." Neither of them are actual violence, but it's not something to spring on players who aren't prepared for it.

You're going to have to provide some evidence that the GM was intending to imply rape for that to stick.

Quote from: jhkimI don't think that implied rape when someone was unconscious and powerless is necessarily better than an explicit statement of "You got raped." Neither of them are actual violence, but it's not something to spring on players who aren't prepared for it.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1090815You're going to have to provide some evidence that the GM was intending to imply rape for that to stick.

Regardless of his intent, he's still responsible for what a reasonable person would conclude. By his own account, he had a planned scene where all the characters were roofied, waking up naked and handcuffed with their assholes sore - then set off to be hunted down.

If he didn't think that implied rape, then he is a sufficiently clueless idiot that UKGE should still consider banning him - on the grounds that such cluelessness combined with his proclivities may inevitably lead to more problems in the future.

Again, I do think that his history should be taken into account - checking with other players in his other games and such. But I think the excuse of "It was actually diarrhea, and I just forgot to mention the shit." is really weak sauce.

Quote from: jhkim;1090824Regardless of his intent, he's still responsible for what a reasonable person would conclude. By his own account, he had a planned scene where all the characters were roofied, waking up naked and handcuffed with their assholes sore - then set off to be hunted down.

By his own account, it was a scat joke, with diahrehha covered clothes taken off as the reason they were naked. It's thin, I grant you, but not out of probability that he just didn't think along those lines.

QuoteIf he didn't think that implied rape, then he is a sufficiently clueless idiot that UKGE should still consider banning him - on the grounds that such cluelessness combined with his proclivities may inevitably lead to more problems in the future.

I think there are a ton of clueless idiots out there at conventions. Nitwits like Anita Sarkeesian invited to speak at Gen Con. Do we really want to go down the road of banning people for being clueless idiots? Whose critieria shall we use?

QuoteAgain, I do think that his history should be taken into account - checking with other players in his other games and such. But I think the excuse of "It was actually diarrhea, and I just forgot to mention the shit." is really weak sauce.

Huh huh. Diarrhea sauce. *ahem*

May-fucking-be. Are we going to ban GMs for forgetting to mention things?

I think the explanation is weak, and I think the whole scenario was ill-conceived. But I don't find it out of the realm of possibility, considering there are a lot of people playing rpgs with, shall we say, eccentric personalities?

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1090706Why is a "family friendly" con approving 18+ content?

They may have just wrongly assumed that 18+ meant scary monsters or lots of combat.

I think the media reports are terrible but it was not a far stretch to imagine that rape was meant since he has said he never mentioned why their bums were sore.

Quote from: jhkimAgain, I do think that his history should be taken into account - checking with other players in his other games and such. But I think the excuse of "It was actually diarrhea, and I just forgot to mention the shit." is really weak sauce.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1090828Huh huh. Diarrhea sauce. *ahem*

May-fucking-be. Are we going to ban GMs for forgetting to mention things?

I think the explanation is weak, and I think the whole scenario was ill-conceived. But I don't find it out of the realm of possibility, considering there are a lot of people playing rpgs with, shall we say, eccentric personalities?

Hehehe. Sauce...

So I don't know this dude - I'd want to hear more from other people who knew him before judging. But I find the diarrhea explanation offputting at best.

Yeah, cons have a lot of eccentric personalities. But there is a point at which someone's eccentricity / bad taste / bad judgement goes too far, such that it detracts from people's enjoyment. I don't know enough to decide about this guy, but it's possible for someone to be at that point. If I was in charge of the con, I don't need to look inside their soul to see if they're really pure or not - I'm just deciding for my event. If they're detracting from the event, then I'd ban them. For their personal games, people can decide for themselves if they want to play with him or not.

Quote from: jhkim;1090824Regardless of his intent, he's still responsible for what a reasonable person would conclude. By his own account, he had a planned scene where all the characters were roofied, waking up naked and handcuffed with their assholes sore - then set off to be hunted down.

If he didn't think that implied rape, then he is a sufficiently clueless idiot that UKGE should still consider banning him - on the grounds that such cluelessness combined with his proclivities may inevitably lead to more problems in the future.

Again, I do think that his history should be taken into account - checking with other players in his other games and such. But I think the excuse of "It was actually diarrhea, and I just forgot to mention the shit." is really weak sauce.

Why don't you just fuck off you pseudo  woke cunt.  Here is more of your style of justice you spineless bastard.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3462[/ATTACH]

Here is the game listing

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3463[/ATTACH]

Before non-British lynch mob enablers like Jkhim comment do yourself a favour and educate yourself on Essex lad culture, club 18/30 holidays and Inbetweeners.  The dreadlocked fucking woke scumbug that started all this would damn well know what that would entail.    What happened at that con does not justify the mob justice that is going on. Given the climate we are in he was stupid to run that scenario not knowing who was going to turn up, but something needs to be done about the woke lynch mobs.

Another thing the player characters were all male.  In Film and TV dramas  anything were a male is concerned is permissible even rape or the threat  of rape on male character is played for laughs (e.g. Happy! S1E7) and parts of male genitalia  found at crime scenes are  joked about in prime time shows like Bones.  Even the BBC saw nothing wrong with  a scene in Happy Valleys were a middle-aged police woman drags a boy into the back of a car and punches him in the balls.


In the mean time here is a few of things that will probably trigger Jkhim.

[video]https://www.facebook.com/BestInbetweenersMoments/videos/1750183215220472/[/youtube]

[video=youtube_share;7sq2Xc1BiZk]https://youtu.be/7sq2Xc1BiZk[/youtube]

https://youtu.be/REZ9le2qFD8

[video=youtube;ln1m-PEfwUI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln1m-PEfwUI[/youtube]

The country which gave us the english language, with all its poetic splendour, the jury system and common law, the constitutional monarchy, parliamentary government and presumption of innocence, the country which started the industrial revolution and brought literacy and industry to a quarter of the globe, a country which was the heart of the Reformation and the Enlightenment.

This country, says this intemperate young lad, now gives us lads shitting themselves while drunk, or possibly raped up the bum, and calls this artistic fiction.

Or possibly the GM was just a numpty.

Quote from: RatmanI think there are a ton of clueless idiots out there at conventions. Nitwits like Anita Sarkeesian invited to speak at Gen Con. Do we really want to go down the road of banning people for being clueless idiots? Whose critieria shall we use?

Mine, obviously.

UKers, please explain the references to "grubby little Essex boys" and "club 18/30" so we Americans have a clearer understanding.

If you want a family friendly con, you don't have 18+ events. You limit games to PG-13 themes and your vendors don't sell products from R-rated IPs in the dealers room. Otherwise, you're full of shit and just using "family friendly" as a marketing slogan.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1090852UKers, please explain the references to "grubby little Essex boys" and "club 18/30" so we Americans have a clearer understanding.

Essex boys were infamous in, IIRC, the 1990s, as particularly laddish youth and young men from the county of Essex in southern England- real dudebros if you will. Club 18/30 was an actual holiday company (which only ceased trading last year), which sent young people, aged 18-30 (surprise) on package holidays to typical party island destinations. One third of customers- average age 19-  were travelling on holiday without their parents for the first time. As you can imagine, these holidays were infamous for drinking and sex. Think 'spring break' if you will. So "grubby little Essex boys" on a "club 18/30" holiday conjures up an image of excess and debauchery. Add in the Inbetweeners references that Gagarth so helpfully provided, and you get an idea of what the GM had in mind when he conceived his scenario.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1090854If you want a family friendly con, you don't have 18+ events. You limit games to PG-13 themes and your vendors don't sell products from R-rated IPs in the dealers room. Otherwise, you're full of shit and just using "family friendly" as a marketing slogan.

Then that would be just about everything accept the My Little Pony Rpg