179 thoughts on “Regarding Anonymous Gaming Trolls, Tabletop, and More”

1. What’s needed moreso is a culture change, for that kind of behaviour to not be expected and let slide. Unfortunately those who dislike it get drowned into silence by those who do it, they’re that loud. I honestly don’t have any clue as to how to go about enacting the required culture change, which is why I don’t speak up on the issue very much.

   Forcing everyone to lose their anonymity may stop some of the abusers, but it won’t by any means stop the problem unfortunately. There’s dozens if not hundreds of sites with posts citing examples from Facebook where people are using their wallet names and are being just as abusive, racist, sexist and bigoted as you and I have come to expect from the gaming community.

   The problem will reduce, to a very minor degree, temporarily. That’s about it.

   When you were a child in video arcades, there was a culture that didn’t accept tantrums. In video games, no culture has put a stop to them or abuse. When people had tantrums and abused people, they were laughed at or muted, but not put down or discouraged. Therein lies the problem.

   The problem is the culture where the community as a whole does not stand up to such childish immature behaviour. It gets a foothold. It becomes accepted. It’s loud enough that it becomes the norm, and other adopt it.

   It’s the culture that needs to change, not the display name. Somehow we need those who have the maturity, who are in the majority, to stand up in unison and reclaim their majority from the loud obnoxious minority. How to get that happening though, oh how I wish I knew a way.

   1. I think Wil addressed a way to get that change started, by causing meaningful repercussions to happen to the offender when they’ve offended enough people enough times.

      “if he’s a shitlord on a consistent basis, maybe his console is banned, his IP is banned, his account is banned, or something that he can’t throw away as easily as an e-mail address ties him to his words and actions, so he will think twice about how he behaves while gaming”

      This seems like a general roadmap for developers of popular online games to start designing feedback systems that punish unacceptable behavior. Some game companies are already working on such systems, since toxic player behavior significantly hurts their bottom line. Example: http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=3388973

2. Anonymity is a civil liberty? I suppose you should ask the question: Why?

   I suppose you might think that it’s like gun laws. You have “the right to bear arms” under the 2nd amendment. That’s fine as long as you’re okay with vastly more small arms in circulation which inevitably leads to an increase in fatal violence. For the most part, America is fine with this tradeoff.

   Unlike gun laws enshrined in constitutional rights, there is no such right for Anonymity. The American first amendment protects free speech – so, you can say what you want to say – but it doesn’t say anything about keeping your identity secret.

   So, I suppose my point is, that if you really want your anonymity badly, you have to deal with some bad apples. The apple tree might bear more fruit; but every once in a while you’re going to get a really bad taste in your mouth.

   1. dont piss on ME and tell me it’s raining… if one of your “bad apples” takes a dump in my mouth, it will be spit out. you can go ahead and swallow, if that’s what you’re into, man. like you said – just gotta roll with it. that’s just it. you DON’T have to deal with those apples. if I steal a basket of fruit during a strongarm robbery, and theres some moldy berries on top, I don’t tip the whole basket into my mouth – I pick the bad ones out and throw them away.

   2. First off as far as the dun laws argument goes it is being approached the wrong way. People should have the right to own whatever type of weapon they want be it pistol, rifle, or assault rifle. However if they use it to commit a crime then they should be dealt with severly to set an example to others that it is socially unacceptable to commit crimes. On the part of privacy in video gaming I champion having privacy. I do not want others to know who I am. However when I game online on for example xbox live I always mute all other players so I do not have to hear them and their vile speech. But here is the thing. If you support the right to free speech then you have to support the rights of others to say what they want even if it is vile hateful comments about how they made your parental unit their most recent conquest.

   3. I think you make an excellent point Justin. There is no Constitutional right to anonymity.

      There’s a place for anonymity when it address issues like Watergate, whistleblowing and similar topics. In the past, anonymous letters to the editors were evaluated based on a real need for anonymity. I believe real reporters have a right to protect their sources as well.

      I also believe if a person wants to spew hateful, racist, misogynistic things, they can. BUT they need to have the courage to actually take ownership of what they say. So if some shitlord wants to comment about Will’s mom or Felicia’s elbows, go right ahead but be prepared to be identified as Joe Fartblossom of Washington Avenue, Peoria, IL.

3. I am amazed at how many people do not know the difference between privacy and anonymity. I believe that anonymity is a pox upon the Internet and the overwhelming majority of us would be better off without it (those in the Witness Relocation Program and those wishing to avoid an abusive ex partner being notable exceptions). After all, it does lead to GIFT.

   At the end of the day, though, if you are not willing to stand behind the things you say (as well as stand up for them) why should I take the time to listen to you?

   1. Anonymity allows those without courage to speak without fear. If you understand this properly, you understand why it is both a curse AND a boon. Sure, trolls who hide behind anonymity are spineless cowards – but there are many spineless cowards who would never troll, and they need anonymity to contribute to the world.

      1. But are you sure that’s a net gain? Are the positive contributions of the anonymous people significantly greater than the damage being done by the negative contributions of anonymous people? In your guesstimate, consider that a significant amount of damage has come from the ease with which a hate group can create large numbers of new accounts to repeat their beliefs and create the illusion of a larger group. Sock puppet accounts.

         On the other hand, Wil is talking about reducing the normalization of anonymity for in-game interactions, not specifically for social media sites like Twitter where voices broadcast opinions more broadly, so maybe both of our points are a little off topic here.

      2. “Anonymity allows those without courage to speak without fear.”

         Extremely well said, even with the amusing irony present for it being said by a person with such a screen name.

      3. Not just spineless cowards but people who would face repercussions for saying things. Suppose you lived in a small town where it was understood that the chief of police and the mayor did whatever they wanted and anyone who opposed them met with “difficulties.” Speaking out against this and tying your name to it would be problematic. You would be quickly silenced and nobody would hear of the issue.

         With anonymity, though, you could spread the word without being able to be quickly silenced. In addition, you wouldn’t risk the lives of your family and friends – who could be threatened to shut you up in case threatening you didn’t work.

         To make a comic book analogy, think of anonymity as a superheroes mask. It prevents the bad guys from finding out who the superhero really is, where he lives, and who his real-life friends and family are. Unfortunately, a supervillain can also put on a mask and become a threat without anyone knowing who HIS friends/family are.

4. Two more days til season three, season three, two more days til season three, SILVER SHAMROCK

5. I have a high functioning autistic 14yo. He gets pretty bent about that stuff. I tell him to use the block feature. I tell him to be cool and not make himself a target. I explain these people are taking the game more seriously, this is just how they play or they’re just goofing around and he should just play with people he knows for a while if it’s too much. He does well and has never had any major issues. He tells me everything down to a description of his daily dumps so I’d say he’s pretty open. So what’s the solution here? I think gamers need to figure out their own ways to cope with and handle the situations when they happen. Just like offline you’re gonna clash with people anywhere you go, the impact it has on your life is up to you. No matter what you do not everyone is gonna like you and be nice to you. I’m not fond of Rachel Ray. She’s not a horrible person, she just strikes me as disingenuine and puts stewed tomatoes in everything.

6. I’m a user of a persistent online pseudonym. It’s persistent in the fact that I use it always, everywhere. It has a reputation. Most people I know in person (“real life”) refer to me by it.

   My reason for using one is so much more meagre than that of most people who use them, but still enough for me to persist. Protection. Personal safety.

   I get in to numerous debates on topics that people can get rather emotional about – politics, health & wellbeing, theism & atheism, vaccination etc. I don’t get abusive, I don’t get personal, I don’t troll, yet I’m still paranoid about someone taking it too far and trying to accost me in person. I’ve had friends who get into similar debates have the names and names of the children’s preschool mentioned to them – something those friends NEVER mentioned online.

   All these people would need if I were forced to use my wallet name is a phonebook, and they’d have my phone number and address. They could turn up at my doorstep and harrass me and my family all because they got too worked up about a simple online debate, a discussion. I do these debates online because I want to keep them online. I don’t want them spilling over into my face at unsuitable times and places.

   I’ve ready too many occasions where someone had disagreements with others, and the others tracked down and went to the person’s employer getting them fired, despite the disagreement being done using entirely in personal time and using personal accounts that had no mention of the employer and in no way represented the employer.

   People do take things too far in “revenge” over disagreements in debates and discussions. This is why I don’t want my wallet name forced to be displayed to all and sundry online. What I do online is irrelevant to my employer, and I want to keep it that way. It’s irrelevant to my family,a nd I want to keep it that way. I work hard at keeping that separation between business and pleasure.

   Forcing “real names” will destroy that separation, and mean that fragging somone online could result in me losing my job or my family being harrassed. I don’t want that. “Real names” online is a bad thing.

7. I think one of the reasons for the need for the online gaming and unintentional solidarity is due to the loss of multiplayer games on the console. Systems lime Xbox one dont have any games right now (that I’m aware of) that allow for more than one person to play against another without going online to do so. Other systems like the WiiU has continued to make games that this is still a thing and I applaud Nintendo for that.
   Using the internet for game play should be a feature or enhancement, and not the only way to play the game.

   Great article, btw!
   Also super excited for season 3 and looking forward to those audio books! I love listening to the books you read. You do a great job with it.

8. Game platforms simply have to offer non-anonymous alternatives where people seeking to avoid trolling behaviour can have their online gaming experience. Not all games offer multiple “arenas” this way but a lot do. People will sort themselves if given a chance.

9. I feel like anonymity is definitely part of the problem. I’ve had run ins with trolls spanning years (they keep trying to invade a community I run) and them remaining anonymous even as they doxxed and stalked other users is a huge issue. On the other hand when it comes to trolls, especially of the –ist variety, it seems to me what would be more effective is people, especially cis het men, sending a clear and consistent message that they will not game with these people. Yes, even if it means you can’t do your raid that night, or you can’t get that extra achievement, or whatever it is. The sad fact is a lot of these idiots won’t listen to anyone that doesn’t share their demographics. However, that’s not an argument against people being attached to their real identities in certain situations, I am just not sure how or who would manage such a thing. It might have to be website by website, like a three strikes and your anonymity is removed policy.

10. I’m one of the few people who comments under his real name on the Internet – yet I often run into discussions in forums and comment threads where my ability to verbally outmanouver people is deemed offensive and hurtful. I grew up in a household where doing that was kind of a sport, at least for my mother. Just as much as people don’t understand why I don’t talk “to my own mother” anymore, I don’t understand how some of the things I wrote could deeply hurt someone so severely that my comments get deleted, my user status is set to moderated only or even suspended. “Was it something I said” is something I have asked myself a million times. I never was in a physical fight my hole life and I could never hurt anyone, yet by argumentatively “winning”, I make people curse at me, report me to the mods etc – something I myself have never done and never will. Cursing is not my style. It cheapens the argument. All I want is to have the last word and “win”. Yes, that’s often enough trolling. And basically it’s what I was taught when I grew up. I basically grew up a fighter with words. I’m basically a stand-up comedian without ever having done it (and therefor I’m actually NOT a stand-up). I’m quick with my mind and I know everything about making a heckler shut up with words.

    In short: a loud-mouth.

    So yeah maybe you’d get rid of all those people telling someone else to kill themselves, who doxx people, who post ugly things on Facebook.

    But thinking about your post at WaPo I have to say: there are already tools available to get a hold of these people. The ones threatening death, rape and abuse. The doxxers.

    Their IPs are logged. The NSA would know how to find them. But they aren’t found because law enforcement doesn’t give a damn. When I read the feeds of all the women on Twitter I support (I’m a feminist – don’t laugh. I am. Being an asshole in conversations with foot-in-mouth-desease who’s “socially awkward” in the way that basically feels as if you are Edward Scissorhands doesn’t prevent you from telling an anonymous misogynistic dick on the Internet that he’s a dick on the internet) I come across so many examples of women who were stalked, who reported it to their local police department, who basically were told “Unless he physically hurts you…”.

    You can’t tell me Twitter is unable to locate the anonymous accounts that were used to send death threats to Anita and Brianna and Zoe or FreeBSDgirl. I simply can’t accept that. Not ALL of them. I haven’t heard ONE example, ONE of these people getting caught by the police. NOT ONE. Until the authorities, who have their hands full with real violence, actual crimes, you know the stuff that happens because of the pretty much non-existent gun-laws in the US (I’m German btw), the war against drugs, the giant number of prisoners and ex-felons who can’t allow another “strike” in their lives etc. get involed – who’s going to care? I mean seriously. It took until this year for the NFL to care about domestic violence – how’s the handling of death threats going to change if it’s basically regarded as a big ‘ol nothing?

    Restraining orders don’t get rid of your fear of your abuser finding you. They don’t change how your depression (and so many people suffer from depression) amplifies anything hurtful you read even if it doesn’t contain rape, murder and doxxing threats.

    All you would achieve via real names is make all the people who are currently anonymous, minorities, show their real identity – and that would give trolls (like me often enough, le sigh) who can’t help themselves while arguing, cannonfodder for getting in the real deep cuts in a regular conversation. I am not someone who says “fat ugly b***”. I won’t talk about your mother. But I can hurt you just the same in a regular conversation – and often enough even I (!) won’t even notice that I’m the dick in the conversation.

    I know all this sucks. But I don’t see how getting rid of anonymity will change anything. To me it feels like internet censorship that’s only hitting the huge number of people who don’t know how to change their DNS server not to see the block messages (example: Turkey during the protests). The only way real names would change anything would be if there was a crackdown by the government on comments on the internet. And there simply isn’t. The only way this would help is if there were a military junta in place like in Thailand where you get thrown in jail for favs and likes right now. The only way this would work if TOR was forbidden, if you get rid of ALL anonymity. In ALL cases. Because those who want to send death threats would simply use TOR all the time. The real crazies out there would know how to plan their verbal a-bombs. The only way for this to work would be getting rid of EVERYTHING private and installing BIG BROTHER in the style of 1984.

    All real names and even a crackdown on murder, death and rape-threats would do is make people chose their words more carefully, censor themselves, and in the end you’d have a situation where law enforcement will tell you “Unless he threated to rape/murder/kill/doxx you…”

    And you wouldn’t even get rid of the self-aware people who simply can’t help themselves being assholes sometimes, like me.

    I know as a conclusion this all sucks big time. I know that it is me who shouldn’t be a dick on the internet. And I could go on and on about how I’m at least not one of the people who commit violent crimes, who “really” hurt people out there, who are already not properly dealt with. But to me it feels like the only way life on the internet right now could change is if all those “real” violent crimes were gone. If law enforcement would have the time to investigate Wesley Crusher style steppings on flowers.

    Right now, the only way to deal with all the assholes on the internet is the companies who run services bringing the hammer down more swiftly themselves. Get moderators into place who execute bans, moderate people. The problem right now is Twitter being open to all forms of communication. To cut down on access to people who consider themselves targets. FreeBSDgirl set up a GG blocklist – I think that is the right step. But it has to happen faster. Assholes on the Internet need to get policed and the only way for that to happen is if Twitter steps up its game. We can not rely on law enforcement. Like I said – I was muted a couple of times in my life already (half a dozen times I think so hey maybe I’m not THAT much of an asshole and the intensity of feeling bad about it maybe… or forget it, still a dick on the internet too often).

    But Twitter’s business model relies on people having access to everyone else. They will NEVER EVER prevent you from speaking directly to celebrities. The way Twitter deals with abuse reports for instance by Brianna Wu is completely laughable. Right now I get the impression that “bringing the hammer down” Scalzi style is the only way to deal with MOST of these problems and getting society more equal is the other.

    Quite frankly as long as 0.1% of the people have more money than 90% of the people, how on earth can we expect those tired, huddled masses NOT to be assholes on the Internet? Hardwick so often explained (for instance on Real Time w Bill Maher) that often enough a hurtful Tweet is just a glimpse into the life of someone who has felt bad right that moment and when you get back to them about being hurtful they apologize and tell you “Hey I was just feeling bad”. People simply FEEL BAD ALL THE TIME in a society that doesn’t take care of each other. And god yes this is all such a “first world problem” I know but honestly I think all those dangerous assholes out there like a certain Baldwin who to me don’t have their head screwed on right are part of this whole problem.

    My root problem was a mother who always wanted to argue about everything and argue it TO DEATH. It sharpened my verbal reflexes. How on earth are we going to expect that getting rid of anonymity on the internet is going to change people’s upbringing?

    3% of my country is voting for the Neo-Nazis every year. Just think about that. Every general election here in Germany, no matter what, no matter how much you get educated in school, is voting for the Nazis. How many of these people hit their significant others? All of them? More? Less?

    If you have 1 Million followers, from a purely statistical standpoint, that’s 30.000 Nazis. Sure they most likely all follow other people in a higher percentage, but let’s just say it’s 20% of them or maybe 10%. That’s still 3.000 Nazis who follow you. All of them denying the Holocost who want Poland to be re-integrated into Germany.

    How on earth are we going to change their thought-process if we only make them show their real name in online discussions.

    I’m sorry but I don’t see it.

    IMHO Twitter needs a bazillion moderators, it needs collaborative banning like FreeBSDgirl developed. It needs tools like WAM forever to shup people (like me?) who can’t help themselves sometimes up. Maybe for a couple of hours, maybe for a day, maybe forever.

    This is what idiots like Sullivan fear – that Feminazis are going to shut “us” all up. And it’s exactly what needs to happen. We need moderation. On Twitter.

    Good luck with that

    sigh

    Feel free to delete this post if it offends in any way. I don’t mind. I’d rather have my words deleted (I don’t consider it censorship) than have them hurt anyone.

11. From the bottom of my heart, thank you for this Wil. People like you give me hope.

12. There is a relatively simple solution, I will use Google for this example, but apple, Microsoft and such like could all do this.

    Create an email domain for verified users, by that I mean you prove to Google that you are a real genuine actual person, that they can identify, and they give you a validated email account.

    Users then, when for example playing on Xbox Live are still anonymous but can be traced in the event of gross online behaviour. Users then can choose to only play in validated parties (where everyone has a verified email account) or play with any, validated or otherwise.

    The same with Twitter for example, a user could choose to only allow validated users to message them or comment on their posts, that way people such as femfreq don’t have to put up with mindless anonymous idiots posting death threats if she doesn’t want to, and if someone is stupid enough to post a death threat using a validated account then they can be traced. Win Win all around

    1. Good idea.

    2. This needs a Like button!

    3. Interesting solution, but it begs the question of how a person would be verified. Driver’s license? Social security number? Giving a real name doesn’t verify that you are who you say you are.

       Another angle to take is that many online games require some sort of payment for subscription. Xbox Live, for example, is not a free service. Many, but certainly not all, subscriptions are paid for by credit card. Information is right there.

13. If I had one request of online game providers, it would be that they consider LIMITING in-game communication, a la how it is for the wii. With one fell swoop you remove some verbal abuse. You remove obstacles for shy players. You remove the Darwinian pressure to join a team chat service for MOBA games. There are all sorts of ramifications spiraling off these things, in various combinations. People would have to learn to practice reading team behavior & macro’ed messaging, it’s a slight difficulty curve, but far from insurmountable. I don’t know. It might help get me back out of my shell, and if this proliferated I’d hear my brother-in-law freak out a bit less often.

14. ” But when gaming online is safe for everyone, because people are held to account for their actions, everyone should be able to play as themselves, without fear of systemic and sustained harassment.”

    This I totally agree with 100%.

15. Wil Wheaton, I love you! I’m a woman, a gamer, and a mother on 9 year old twin boys who are fledgling gamers. We’ve been very careful in raising them to introduce them to games with largely positive communities, and to help educate them about positive gamer culture, ensuring that they treat the people they play with, with respect. To that end, mostly at the moment, they only play with people we know IRL. This helps HUGELY with accountability, and I hope by the time they are then exposed to a wider circle of online gamers that they don’t know, they will have internalised a culture of respect and honor for all people, on screen and off.

    It’s incredibly important that we continue to have discussions about how we can both protect people’s right to privacy and anonymity, AND hold people accountable to unacceptable behavior.

    Recently in a League of Legends match, after revealing I was married, I got “insulted” with “You’re fat. And your(sic) a wife.”

    Really? “You’re a wife” is an insult now? That to me was a defining moment in just how misogynistic the gamer community still is, and how much of a long way we have to go in making it safe for all.

16. I think I understand what you’re getting at. You seem to want bans and other anti-harassment/bad manners/abusive bull**** measures to have more teeth. So that when banned, the arsehole can’t just get an new email address and be back playing immediately. Is that about right?

    My issue is that in order to do that without making such information available to everyone, it would have to only be known by whatever company is operating those games. Considering how much spam I get, trusting those companies not to sell that information is a bit foolish. Now, if there were specific laws against sharing that information, I might be more comfortable with it. As it is, I THINK such information is only confidential if it includes financial data. Let me stress this, I think that is correct but I could (and probably am) wrong.

    Another thing that could be done is what Square-Enix is doing with RMT in Final Fantasy XIV. They ban the account AND the game license itself, requiring the re-purchase of the game in order to play. It won;t eliminate the problem, but it might help. Another way is to give players more options to blacklist other players.

    Ultimately, it’s cultural. People are jerks, everything they see and hear encourages them to be jerks, and what little doesn’t is downed out in the cacophony.

    ~get out cane and sits in the rocking chair on the porch*~

    *I wonder what that kind of phrase will be in the future? “Opening a flip-top phone”? Or maybe “Plug in my controller”?

17. “First, something I had not considered when I worked out, researched, and wrote my column: the very real possibility that some people who are survivors of various forms of abuse, or people who have dealt with stalkers may feel even more exposed while gaming online if they were forced to play games under their actual identities.”

    I’m an abuse survivor and I play under my real name, but as a survivor, I understand why many of those who underwent the same things I did will not use their real names in the online and social media world. Sure, you consider yourself privileged, Wil, but I would also consider myself and those like me who survived their abuse privileged (just in a different way). For you, your willingness to be open and honest about yourself in the gaming world is a matter of confidence, but for the abused and stalked, it’s a matter of safety. I’m thankful and fortunate that my abusers don’t follow my gaming life, but I know others who are not that fortunate. There must be some kind of middle ground we can reach, a something between openness and anonymity with regard to gaming identities that would create some sense of safety for everyone. And you are right: it sucks that there are people who decide to use anonymity as a petri dish of teeming hate, because it does indeed ruin things for everyone.

    “But if you ban anonymity in gaming, it will make things even more terrible for women! This argument fails to consider or address the root cause of women being treated poorly in online gaming (men harassing women, threatening women, and generally making it miserable for women to play games unless those women adopt a masculine identity).”

    True, but there are men who get harassed too (maybe not as much, but I’ve seen guys bullied in WoW for a number of reasons). I understand the point you’re making, however, and I’ve experienced my fair share of harassment from both men and women in the online gaming world, but here is where we need men– the good guys, like you– to help us overcome the current obstacles in the gaming world.
    When Felicia Day wrote her post on GamerGate, I told her the story of what happened to me the day of the terrible shooting in Ottawa. When I heard what had happened on Capital Hill, I felt so terrible that I just had to get away from the news and go for a walk. I wandered into my local game shop and said, “Guys, I just feel awful. Does anyone want to play a game? I just don’t want to think about what happened right now,” and instantly, two guys I had never met before who were just milling about in the shop came to play a game of Machi Koro with me. We ended up playing for two hours and had an awesome time. I made new friends and walked out of the shop feeling that the world was not such a bad place after all. That day, gamer guys proved themselves the champions I know them to be, and while obviously not every guy would be as forthcoming as this, it’s guys like these who we need on team-inclusion. Maybe instead of breaking online anonymity, we could have some sort of compassion in gaming something-or-other that would teach all gamers, not just guys, about online gaming conduct and player empathy.

    “The existence of a discussion about how women are portrayed in gaming, and whether that affects how welcomed women feel in the gaming community, isn’t an attack on you, Mister #NotAllMen. In fact, it isn’t and never was about you.”

    But what they really want to tell you, Wil, is how much it’s about ethics in journalism. 😉

18. I agree with most of what you’re saying and I think it’s obvious to condemn harassment of any sort, but when it comes to anonymity, there is no way to decide if a person should have the right to stay hidden anonymous.
    If a person once abused their anonymity, should they be banned from using an alias online, or can they redeem themselves? My feeling is that you had more thoughts on this than there were words to read. These are strong opinions which I can respect even if I don’t necessarily agree with all of them.

    Going on to this whole “#hashtag discussion”, I think you put it best in your last paragraph: “… the vast majority — a silent majority, but a majority still — of gamers are awesome people …”
    Sadly this nuance is barely seen in the current state of the conflict. Maybe because twitter is not the best place to dicuss and subtleties don’t fit in 140 characters, or maybe because generalizing people into groups of stereotypes is something that makes one’s arguments seem even stronger ( it surely finds use in politics ), I cannot say.
    What I will say however is that there were always people on the internet, who do not follow the simple rule of “Don’t be a dick.”, and it is also not new for them to latch onto a popular topic and pull it down until it’s nothing more than semi-political trench fights and name-calling.
    For people who believe in an actual discussion however it is hard to abandon such a large movement-ish kind of group of people and start a new one, only to be then followed by all these trolls they didn’t want in the first place.

    Anyhow, those were my thoughts.
    I hope I didn’t get anything copmletely wrong, not a native speaker.

19. You can have accountability in online gaming with moderation and karma systems without forcing real names, which people can easily cheese anyways. Posting a real sounding and yet fake name games they system.

    But I do agree that we need better accountability and moderation in online game. I was playing Trove with my 9 year old daughter (who doesn’t know Wil from acting but instantly took to him when she met him). In the general chat of a kid’s game (clearly aimed at kids) trolls were directing kids to MeatSpin.com and LemonParty.org for game guides. One of the trolls was named AssFetus. Really not cool for a kid’s game, but there is zero moderation. When I suggested in the game’s subreddit that perhaps they get free community volunteer moderators I was attacked saying as a parent I should merely expect that as normal behavior in any online game that kids will be exposed to sites like MeatSpin.com and I’m a terrible parent if I don’t want my 9 year old exposed to harassment.

    We shouldn’t expect harassment to be the norm.

20. A lot of people cannot reconcile the notion of an intellectual gamer. The thesis in your writing was very clear and I didn’t read that you are advocating for the eradication of online anonymity. What you are clearly advocating for is online accountability.

    The days of gamers being little more than basement-dwellers are long gone, comic-cons are THE place to be and praise has to go to someone for that shift. Seeing a suited executive deep in conversation with a wookie or a princess from a fantasy online game is not something that would raise an eyebrow anymore. There is something wonderful about that.

    The thing I find difficult to understand is why all of a sudden territory is being marked. Objectivity and ethics in journalism has been hotly debated for decades (and jeez, when a person is writing a review based on their personal experience how can it NOT be subjective?) but why is it being used as the territory marker? What does objectivity and ethics in journalism have to do with vile, anonymous death threats against ANYONE?

    Before a resolution can be found (and can we ever really resolve human nature?) the issues MUST be separated.

    1) Anonymous threats against the personal safety of any individual and their family and actions against the sanctity of their home must be dealt with as though they were made in person.

    An email written on a keyboard with a throwaway email address is not taken seriously. Write that same letter with cutout letters from magazines and newspapers and the cavalry gets called. Perhaps it’s the visual nature of the anonymous threat. One seems benign, all written with the same font on a blank white screen. The other is sinister and malevolent.

    2) Ethics and objectivity in journalism. People are being paid, or given, a product to test and then write a review. A holiday resort, a smartphone, a tablet, a restaurant… but gasp – a game? Is it not ridiculous that a game, something designed for fun, can get turned around and become cause for such vileness?

    Short answer?
    1) Expose and prosecute those who cause others to live in fear, just the same as though those threats were made threats in person.

    2) Ethics in journalism – well, it is what is always has been and always will be.

    Why can’t we all just be like 6 year old George (who sent you his allowance for TableTop) who likes to have fun playing games. Simple, the way kids keep it.

    🙂

21. I have to admit that when I read Wil’s article the first time, I was one of the people who thought he might be suggesting an end to anonymity online. And that didn’t sound like him, so I decided to wait and see what shook out later. Reading this update, I’m getting that he didn’t mean that. But…I still don’t know if he’s suggesting a hard solution, or just raising the issue for discussion.

    So, I’m gonna make an attempt to flesh out what I think is at the heart of the trolls/bullies issue. I think the culprit is lack of community, rather than an abundance of anonymity. And I’m gonna try to demonstrate that using the metaphor that Wil already used: an arcade.

    In an arcade setting, in Wil’s experience, jerks were publicly shamed by most of the other gamers. The jerks learned that their behavior was unwanted– and not going to go unchallenged– and they either changed their behavior, or they stopped going to that arcade. And nice gamers were happy. 🙂

    What is happening in that example is peer pressure. And it’s awesome. It doesn’t require everyone in the arcade to know each other’s real names and addresses. Instead, it works because a community of people are setting limits and boundaries, and then enforcing them in the moment through negative and positive reinforcement. The people who are shamed by the group either learn to control/change their behavior, or they learn that they are not welcome in that community.

    Have you ever been on a message board where there’s no official moderation, but people TOTALLY call you out for being a jerk? I have. It’s horribly embarrassing when you’re the jerk! And I am speaking from personal experience. I didn’t need to have my full name and address posted to feel the shame of that peer pressure!

    In an online game, community is often less easy to find. If another player in an MMORPG comes up to my character and starts grinding their character’s crotch in my face, no one says anything. Mostly, no one even notices. I can call out “stop it, jerk” or ask for help from the players around me, but I don’t even know if anyone else has public chat turned on! So there is no immediate negative consequence for the jerk. The community, in essence, allows the behavior.

    The only recourse I have is to lodge a formal complaint. Which makes me the arcade-equivalent of the pissy kid who calls the manager over because someone stole my quarter. Boo to that! (It also side-steps community and asks for policing instead, which is a completely different beast. Peer pressure is a force to be reckoned with. Authority, on the other hand, is a burden to be overthrown.)

    So instead, I say nothing. And I turn off all chat, and try to avoid the Lions Pride Inn after dark so my character isn’t sexually e-assaulted. And there I am — the nice gamer — changing MY behavior, instead of the jerk having to change his/her behavior.

    And it’s that chain of events repeated, and escalated, ad infinitum that is making things crappy for nice gamers. Perma-banning doesn’t functionally exist, and doesn’t really help anyway, as the jerk just gets jerkier and goes elsewhere with the jerkiness. I think instead that community response is the way to stop most of it, just like in the arcade.

    So I think the questions should be, essentially: Why is the kind of subtle and constant peer pressure that creates a safe environment in Wil’s arcade example not already happening in online games, and how do we remedy that?

    1. This is exactly the kind of response I wanted to leave. If you want things to change, you don’t need the real identity of the people who are misbehaving, just a way to associate their behavior with their in-game identity and make sure that other players know it. Because as you said, if no one notices, then there can be no repercussions.

       Maybe a good way to do this would be to allow players to rate or somehow comment on other player’s conduct in a way such that all other players could see their rating and avoid those players who are jerks. It’s not fool proof, but it would be the equivalent of the arcade scenario where those with a bad reputation would be shunned and there would be no need to use real names.

       That’s my idea at least. Full disclosure though, I mostly play single player games; partly because I don’t want to deal with trolls and partly because I like to be able to stop at any time without affecting anyone else.

22. “But doing so requires casting off the cloak of anonymity. (…) …a minority who seem to believe I am advocating for an end to online privacy (which I clearly am not).”

    I understand and appreciate the argument you’re making for ending anonymity online. (Although, much like G+ and Facebook “real name” policies, I think you’re foolishly overlooking the many legitimate reasons people have for disguising their identity online. And the very real harm that can result if you strip that anonymity from them.)

    But you can’t claim that you’re for eliminating one way in which people protect their privacy and then claim, in the very next sentence, that you’re not advocating for that.

    1. I hope you are aware that the word Privacy does not have the same definition as the word Anonymous. They do have much in common but any dictionary can show you where they are different. “Without name or with an unacknowledged name”. “Being free from unwanted or undue intrusion or being apart from others”. I don’t see why we can’t have freedom from intrusion while gaming. I do see how being without a name can give licence to those who can only have fun by keeping other people from having fun.

23. I’m still not clear on how this “anonymity for some, as long as it’s the good kind” would work in practice, but I was generally in agreement right up to the point where sadly you went off the reservation and lambasted people not involved in harassment for simply stating their views. Is there really a “discussion” about how women are portrayed in gaming? Because right now it seems like all detractors to the prevailing feminist standpoint are simply dismissed as gamergaters or (in this case) the wonderfully patronising “Mister #NotAllMen”. You believe it’s “insanity” to expect better ethical standards in gaming reviews? Why not listen to someone who is A) actually in the business of gaming reviews, and B) who has actually appeared on your own show, and see what they have to say on the matter (also read the comments, particularly Bain’s replies, he makes his points exceptionally well) – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaMccosnRMc

24. iv found one game that has a lot of nasty trolls is start trek online players are always nasty and the sense of cumminity is gone

25. [Standing ovation] Well done, sir. Well done!

26. Due to these types of players, everywhere, I do not game online- or when I do, for instance, play Planet side 2 or ArcheAge, I solo. I reject groups. I don’t answer comments n most instances. I stay away, because I’m nearly 43, and NO ONE has the right to talk down to me especially if they’re younger.

    Don’t think the way I play the game is right? Play your own game. Think I’m using a stupid skill or class? Keep your opinion to yourself.

    These people are mostly conservative. Conservatism has hate, ignorance and power trips (over machismo) as core principles. They’re taught by their poor excuse for a father or mother that belittling people and hyping yourself up is the way a real American acts, when it’s the precise opposite- real Americans are inclusive, kind, and caring.

    Will isn’t asking for or suggesting any action regarding anonymity. He’s pointing out that there are too many idiots in our society who can’t handle being anonymous without abusing the advantages, because they don’t get punished.

    When you were !little kid and were a shitlord, what happened? Your things were taken away from you by parents. These internet shitlords need someone to take away their things, be that the ISPs, police, gaming networks, etc. See how fast trolls keep trolling when they are punished for being dickwads.

27. I agree that it comes down to people needing to be responsible for their actions. People coming from a place of understanding or love who are anonymous aren’t the problem, and the people with brains understand that. Anonymity does not give anyone the right to make threats to a person’s life or stalk them, and the problem is we’ve let it become a beast that we’re having trouble taming. Trolling begets trolling and the trolls get worse with time and respond less and less to reason. Having discussions like this are important to figuring out a solution to the problem. Thank you for bringing it up.

28. I love everything about this, Mr. Wheaton. As a double x chromosome carrying game enthusiast, holding people accountable for being shitlords is an amazing idea, and the fact that we CAN do this via IP and account banning without forcing everyone to show their identity is a very good start to making people be accountable for their actions.

    If game developers would be able to incorporate something like this, and actually make it work…the gaming world would become safer for everyone and I think, eventually, the novelty of being a shitlord will wear off when their platform is taken away.

    Unfortunately, we will always have other platforms they create for themselves and will work to override protections put in place…but at least this is a start, and a step in the right direction..and it will take ALL of us legit and honorable gamers to stand up to these shitlords and let them know that we are fed up with them crapping all over our playground.

29. The problem with stripping away privacy because of a few people who behave badly is that you’ll be punishing the many because of the few.

    I use my real name in conjunction with my online persona because I simply do not care. If some internet toughguy wants to show up at my door and pick a fight, I’ll deal with that when it happens. Hasn’t happened yet.

    But then you have the celebrities. You think Felicia Day wants to log into world of warcraft and have her identity announced? Think of the sheer thousands of pm’s she’d get from fans and creeps. Or the reaction that Pamela Horton would get in League of Legends.

    Your idea of banning a particular console of a known bad manner player is a good one, but the legal ramifications of that action mean that an angry mother (or gamer) would immediately turn around and sue for that connectivity back. Or if the competing console simply said “Hey, we don’t discriminate like XXX company does.” and suddenly gamers flock to that machine instead.

    The problem with playing IRL with celebrity cheat codes enabled is that you sometimes miss the “common man’s” view of things. The easy solution, and I know this sounds really simplistic but I PROMISE you it works, is to simply ban or mute the people who are keeping you from having fun. I’ve played WoW for a decade, and have tested this method numerous times, and can swear to it’s efficacy.

    Lastly, and I know this is a hot button issue for you, but I’d challenge you to look behind the horrible actions of a few and actually learn what #GG is about. I think you’d be surprised.

30. As a bit of perspective, before online and before even role-playing games, a healthy third of all gamers were a royal pain. They would cheat, argue rules insanely and behave in a manner that allowed no dignity or fun to be preserved. When role play came along, they would cheat and try to destroy groups of friends.

    Since it was all in person, the extreme cases got weeded out and the more subtle of these slowly developed reputations. Oddly some of these could be fairly good friends. Loyal and dependable friends. They were still the sort that you wanted to tell their girlfriends and business partners to run and not walk away from. Before the noxious phrase “Bros before …” was coined they followed this rule. Even then their political leaning was almost entirely predictable.

    After role-playing showed up, they were the consistent player killers. They cheated with new abandon. You could be their friend, but in the end you had to give up playing any character with grace, taste, dignity or any theme apart from bringer of destruction. Their fantasy almost always bends toward discord and destruction. The best of them could be loyal and even able to make some sacrifices, just as long as the net effect was the destruction of what other players were enjoying.

    By modifying advancement systems it is possible to rehabilitate some of the troublemakers and have the rest give up early. When points are given by other players votes and by rewarding sacrifice instead of punishing death, a role play system can manage to have those who engender participation and enjoyment to out prosper those who go out of their way to destroy participation and enjoyment.

31. Perhaps if a video game came with a limited number of registration codes, and once those codes were banned for bad behavior, that game could no longer be played online, then the abusers might think twice.

    Using a real name online — in a game, on tumblr, or even for some when leaving a review on amazon — is just too big a risk for too many people for too many reasons.

32. First of all, I want to say thank you for taking the time to discuss this like an adult, acknowledging that this is a nuanced situation, and encouraging mature conversation. Seriously, thank you.

    And now I’m going to disagree with you because I can see more shades of gray than your article and post take into account. Anonymity and pseudonymity are important for more than just political dissidents and domestic abuse victims. The thing is that real names already come with a limited degree of anonymity (or lack thereof). Example: if your name happens to be Amy Johnson or Brian Simpson, and you live in a large-ish city, you can do just about anything you want online, short of run for Congress or get arrested for a felony, without much in the way of consequences for using your real name. If you have a common enough name, that is its own form of protection. Bosses can Google you, a friend of a friend can try to find out more about you, but outside of immediately obvious social networks, your story is buried in the flotsam of everyone else with the same name. Granted, advances in search technology might reduce this in the future, but for now, it’s hard to find out much about someone with a common name, unless you already know a lot about them.

    On the other hand, if you have a very rare name, anything you do out there is incredibly easy to find. Once I realized that, I became hyper-vigilant about not using my real name anywhere or letting it be connected to the pseudonyms I use. This is not because I am embarrassed by my online activities. I do not troll people who do not know it’s me (and even then, the goal is usually to make them laugh). I use pseudonyms because the grand collection of my online activities should not be laid out on page one of a simple Google search.

    While I’ve had many discussions (online and in person) with people who do not comprehend the notion of ever having negative consequences from anything they do being misunderstood, that has not been my experience. All it takes is the misunderstanding of one person with power over you. I was once accused at work of being some kind of hardcore pr0n junkie because I mentioned in a casual conversation over lunch that I sometimes watch anime. The person who flew off the handle over this information was my boss. These things happen. So I tend to be very careful about what information about me is available online, no matter how innocuous it might seem. And I’ve learned that I shouldn’t discuss personal hobbies at work (would hate to see what that boss would think of me playing Minecraft or gasp Cards Against Humanity!).

    Am I a little paranoid? Probably, but not without reason. And yes, I have been stalked online by a relative. I have friends with similar experiences who are similarly paranoid.

    My point is that I choose to be a decent person in online interactions, even though I’m occasionally a jerk on the phone or in person. Forcing me to use my real name will only silence me, not make me be more or less of a jerk. Ultimately, I agree with what Bastard Sheep said above: eliminating anonymity will not solve the underlying problem–it takes a cultural change to do that.

    People did not start saying terrible things to each other when they got to hide behind a computer screen. Displaying the name on their driver’s license next to their awful comments will only keep the honest people honest.

33. I’ve been bullied in person, for years. (Long since over.) So have many others. When someone is a target of a mob, the mob provides its members with a lack of accountability, whether they’re anonymous or not. Stripping anonymity from the target leaves them nowhere to hide. And having some sort of private-yet-accountable system seems ripe for technological attacks.

    Removing anonymity makes everyone more vulnerable, but it won’t put them level, and the lowest may be made far too low.

34. A compromise for online gaming might be allowing players an anonymous username, but have the gaming companies require ID verification in order to sign up for the account with the anonymous username. This way players are allowed to keep their identity secret from other players, while at the same time companies and authorities have a means of tracking and banning those who are harassing and/or threatening the other players. This is more thorough than a console ban, which is easily circumvented by purchasing a different console, or an IP ban, which is even easier to circumvent.

35. If one is to have an opinion on an issue, whatever it may be, it’s best to have to courage of your convictions and put your name behind your words. I’ve had some lively debates with, well, some pretty horrible people. But I’ve never found it necessary to be abusive or vulgar with them. Make no mistake. I’ve been sorely tempted. Most respond in kind, and I rarely bother anymore with those that don’t.

    I fully admit that I don’t understand the troll mentality. I have no idea why someone would do harm simply because the opportunity presents itself. I never will.

    I realize the concerns people have about their privacy, but the right to privacy, like all other rights, carries with it inherent responsibilities. That is the thing most often forgotten.

36. I think I’d like to see more games remove the chat feature and just use more preset messages. Look at Hearthstone. You can taunt the other player, congratulate them, thank them etc.

    It’s a simple and clean way to still interact with the other player. It might not work so well for team-based games though, so there can be an exception in those cases where free chat can be justified as being necessary to the gaming experience.

37. Troll mentality is not that hard to understand, for a gamer it should be fairly easy to understand.

    Imagine that you would rather win unfairly with you opponents knowing but unable to prove you cheated than to lose. If you don’t know this guy, you have not played a lot of table top games. Play magic for a while or join a larp and you may even find they outnumber the mature players.

    Second assume that you would rather totally destroy your opponent than have a really good match where it was a struggle to overcome your opponent. Again an easy person to find in most gaming groups.

    Now imagine that you carry the adversarial game relations into the real world. Cheating no problem, Being suspected is an issue because they watch you closer but also a reward because you are getting away with it.

    There are a lot of tricks or defenses the proto troll may use to justify their continued behavior. These justifications are hiding and protecting a fairly basic maturity issue. After branding the targets as suckers, losers, easily riled or whatever, it is easy enough for them to enjoy attacking the folk that they have put in a category they have no empathy for.

    The gamer I just described is fairly likely to troll. He probably can’t help himself. Giving him anonymity is like letting him be banker in monopoly. He wins, you lose and he wants to play again!

38. I think the problem with this sort of thinking is that, while I understand you don’t believe it is the end of anonymity, it leads to something far far worse. In tying accounts to more concrete identities, it makes much more difficult to not only speak out with a dissenting opinion… such as in regards to say… Israel/Palestine… but also makes doxxing information that much easier by putting it all in a public place.

    I, personally, am also wary of giving that much power to console developers because, as we’ve seen with X-Box, they aren’t exactly the most transparent or fair with the information. They do with it as they wish. For most, that might not be a very big deal. Who cares if a self-interested corporation has your data tied to an account? But such companies are fallable and the tactics of shitlords are as such that they could and would easily false-flag those they wish to silence.

    And, with your account tied to your name, IP, etc., I think you would find that your exclusion from the internet would be a bit harder to shake and probably a lot harder to reinstate.

    I also do not wish any of the illicit pornographic activities that I get up to on the internet to be of any corporation’s purview. It is my depraved prerogative and not information that I, personally, wish to have linked to my name, IP address, location, etc.

    That last one was a joke. Or was it?

    On its face, this simply isn’t a very practical idea. I think your heart is in the right place, harassment is terrible, but the issue is much less black and white than this. As much as I’d like to say that the lines are so cut and dry, almost nothing in life is. Isn’t that what makes it so interesting?

39. “He probably isn’t 12. According to the ERSB, the average age of a video gamer is 34.”

    Hey, I just want point out that that’s incredibly faulty logic. (Disclaimer: I’m not a statistician and I also don’t know if anyone more qualified has pointed this out. I also just learned what abject logic is from QI 2 weeks ago.)

    It’s abject logic with a huge margin for error. If you want to predict the age of trolls, you would have to work inductively. Right now you’re saying a statement of equivalent to “I have a frog, most frogs are green, I have something green”, which is obviously faulty. More reliably would be something like “I have a 100 frogs, most of those frogs are green, most frogs are green”. Doing it the way you did is horribly unfair to the entire gaming population.

    As well, the average age statistic from the ESRB is for all gamers. Given that a lot, if not most, people who play games don’t play games online or with any sort of chat, the statistic is pretty much inadmissible. For instance, it’s equally valid for me to say that since the majority of the population is female, it’s probable that toxic players are female. If you want to do a real analysis on the ages of trolls, you would have to analyse the specific populations they’re in.

    No offence Wil, but I don’t think you’re really an expert on this subject. I mean, obviously harassment and toxicity are bad, and you definitely can and have given good advice on individual responsibility in dealing with it (Don’t Be a Dick and all), but I don’t think you’re the best person to talk about how to deal with it on a systemic level. If the Washington Post wanted to do a good discussion on toxicity, I would say interviewing Lyte from Riot Games would be a good choice.

40. Playing online with strangers
    Fuck that noise, salt the earth and never look back. Barring a new age of enlightenment for all the world, online gaming with strangers is always going to be a crapshoot. That the games focused on it are usually(not always) far below the curve of quality gaming doesn’t help.I loves me my single player and occasionally plays multiplayer with good friends from before, it’s the only way to be sure.My lament is that local multiplayer has been shat on for so long it’s not even funny now. Thankfully, Binding of Isaac: Rebirth holds that torch proudly up.

    …..And that’s why I don’t write comments just after waking up.

41. Wil, I really, really liked your article when I first read it this morning and I like it even more after reading this blog. It just makes me think you are even more awesome than I already thought you were. Thank you for that….

42. Remember when YouTube forced real names, and that solved their toxic comments problem? I don’t.

    I do remember how the comments became massively better when they stopped rewarding negative behaviour and started only rewarding positive though.

    Having persistent punishments like banning of physical consoles so you need to buy a new one is something that might work, but I think using the words “anonymity” vs “real names” just clouds the issue…

    (Also, I like to think I’m not a troll, and forced real names would suck for me too, because my nickname IS my real identity. Speak to half of my close friends IRL and mention the name that’s on my birth certificate and they won’t know who you’re talking about…)

43. The key issue: Accountability. Currently, anonymity allows negative actions without significant penalty.

    I wrote this back in 2011, when there were discussions about the real name requirements of Google+

    —
    With a central identity system – you really would not be anonymous, so there is a paradox between the need for identification, and the need for anonymity.

    But – for us that ain’t bad to the bone – maybe we don’t really need anonymity – just the ability to carry different masks in different settings.

    Anonymity can be required in certain contexts (You might not want your knitting addiction to be publicly known) – so you would sign on with your net identity, but register and appear on a site/circle/zone with a separate persona belonging to that site/circle/zone (or, your main persona, if you so desire).

    I still would like the ability to recognize an online abuser by his/her reputation, so if that persona misbehaves, his/her identity would get “bad karma” associated with the site – which would remain, even if he/she registered a new persona on that site.

    What if all your personas have bad karma – should that start reflecting on your identity? If so – there needs to be a way to “cleanse you karma” – such as decay over time, or acts of penance.Complex stuff, this, when you start thinking about it.

    We need accountability, while protecting the identity. That accountability has to follow your online persona, so that you can’t easily register another account (in the same context/community) after being banned or blocked.

44. Don’t be offended by this, my man, but THIS is not a sentence I expected to see…

    > Oh! Also next week, I’m filling in for Larry King

45. Don’t forget your Gold Bond.

46. I don’t think the internet is salvageable. No opinion is acceptable, there is no discussion any more. If there are rules passed about anonymity people will by pass them via fake accounts and what not. At this pint in history the net is just about the most toxic environment around, it’s a shame.

47. So I agree with your ideology, but believe reality will be a disappointment to you. Sure it would be great if everyone was decent to each other. It won’t happen, because some people suck. it doesn’t matter what you do to ‘fix it’, some people will always suck, and suck will always find a way.

    That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try, if you can achieve improvement. However it means you need to be realistic about what you may accomplish, and just as importantly be aware of the potential unintended consequences and be sure not to end up with a net negative. That’s the hard part, as anyone who has studied politics or law will tell you.

    Generally speaking there are few original ideas. Most people involved in the industry have said ‘hey, let’s make the experience better’. It’s exceedingly rare when someone comes up with a way to do it that doesn’t cause more problems than it solves.

    I think you, and many others, give FAR too much weight to anonymity. I often use an online id – like phoenix182, not because I’m trying to stay anonymous but because it’s easier to type than kristin guttormsen, and frankly a better identifier usually (there are several other kristin guttormsen’s in the world, but almost no one else ever uses phoenix182). My anonymity neither allows nor encourages me to behave any differently than I do any other time. I’m an asshole when being an asshole is called for (in my opinion), or sometimes when I have a bad day. This can be in person to a high ranking official in public, or online to a transient in a private chat room. I am what I am, and it’s up to others to deal with that. The medium of communication and other specifics aren’t relevant. Now, I may be a minority in that, but I’m certainly not unique.

    I also think the glaring elephant in the discussion is the subjectivity that would likely be applied to the things you suggest. Who gets to define what’s allowed, and what’s offensive? Frankly that’s not even a good way to phrase it because NO ONE has the right to go through life unoffended, and when they are it’s up to them to choose to endure it, retort, or leave. While that can certainly create negative feelings and conflict anything else IS censorship and falsehood.

    Now there is a difference between being offended/upset at what someone says or does and say, breaking a clear law. For instance, if I say “I wish the President would die,” that’s perfectly legal but might offend someone. As such it essentially MUST be allowed. However if I say “I’m going to kill the President with a rifle in DC next Wednesday” (which I’m NOT saying secret service) then I’ve committed a crime, and a serious one. That certainly shouldn’t be allowed.

    While it’s true that private property owners can somewhat pick and choose what they want to allow it’s not a valid course for the industry as a whole if you want to improve anything. Doing so will lead to issues where Game A prohibits discussion of religious dogma, while Game B doesn’t. People going from one to the other are likely to err and get into trouble. In nearly every case of differing thresholds and definitions the result is problems and there are so many games that no one could ever have a clue what to say and what not to. EULA’s are already so long no one ever reads them except as a joke, imagine if each had to contain a lexicon of banned words/phrases/topics!

    That means requiring a unified standard and I ASSURE you it will be impossible to achieve more than a bare majority when it comes to defining those standards. One person will insist on genderless language, another will demand religion not be brought up, yet another will be offended by politics, while someone else will be outraged if someone mentions climate change (or David Hasselhoff, or anything else you can name). Someone is ALWAYS going to be offended by ANYTHING, so either you allow nearly everything or give up on allowing communication beyond pre-programmed signals (attack, go left, im me, etc).

    It’s as you say, a case by case personal responsibility for what we say and do, rather than generalities and rules. The only problem is finding a way to affix that responsibility fairly without undue consequences to other aspects. I, like most others, have no idea how to resolve that.

48. Wow… Wil Wheaton suggesting that people should not be dicks, that’s a new one 😉

    But seriously. It’s good to see you address age old troll problem. I only skimmed through the comments so what I write here will most likely be redundant:

    First of all, I don’t play games online and I never really have. Obnoxious shitlords were the main reason that kept me from it/drove me away. Well, it’s not entirely true: I used to play multiplayer with friends (and still do sometimes) on private servers and the like. Meaning no strangers, exclusively people I know in real life. So, take everything I write here with a grain of salt. As it’s written from a spectator’s view.

    As others have suggested removing anonymity might not be the way to go but the addition of accountability. But I think I should clarify what I understand as anonymity:
    Names are useless by themselves. If someone tells you he’s going out for a beer with Rick and you have no idea who Rick is, you can replace the name with “some guy” and for you it won’t make any difference.
    Without additional information any name is just a bunch of letters. As such, someone who uses the consitent pseudonym “Boney McDork” around the web is not anonymous anymore. You might recognize him on another website (“Hey, it’s Boney McDork, I’d recognize this avatar anywhere!”). You can’t track him down and trash his car with this information, his privacy is conserved, but you will recognize him. His pseudonym and avatar are linked with other information (“He helped me out on this message board with this problem I had.”).

    With my definition, you can only be anonymous within a specific group or community, there’s no such thing as complete anonymity. This leads me to the conclusion that the solution to the troll problem should not depend on wether the troll is known to somebody or not. I also don’t think that banning players will solve the problem. He will either create a new account and be back as obnoxious as ever or go to another game and be a troll there. Sure, the stronger the ban (IP vs. entire console by unique identifier) the more effective as it becomes more difficult to evade.

    As others said, the solution likely lies in the community. At least MMOs or most FPSs where there are people around. The problem with peer pressure is that people need to be around and people to notice. In the arcade setting this works without a doubt. People playing different games notice when someone is harassed. This doesn’t work very well in the online setting. people are not actually physically around each other. Although there might be thousands of people online playing the game, you might be in an area where nobody else is around.

    I have no idea what the best way to tackle this problem is. Moderation is just a way to hide it, it fights the symptoms but not the disease. It is really a very nuanced and tricky problem and real world analogies will most likely fail at some point.

    Although my post might or might not suggest otherwise, I think you’re on the right track, Wil.

    And of course, games should be fun. Nobody should have to play a game in fear.

    You know what, I’m putting “Play More Games” on my ToDo-List, right after “Play Games”

49. I guess it’s important to state WHICH kind of anonymity you mean. This is the angle that has you made be missunderstood.

    Being identified to the provider of the game should be acceptable, as they pose the host and as such have the responsibility to maintain a social environment. We as players have do adhere to his/her rules. Isn’t this already standard in most games? Most of the trolling within games i see is due to the owner of the game not enforcing its social rules, accidently or purposefully. Hence blaming trolls and their anonymity as a root of the problem doesn’t add up for me.

    And I don’t see how this is connected with the gg-scandal, which seems to go on mostly on twitter, 8chan and whatever. Those boards are a different kind of beast, a dedicated soap box, where every troll on earth can spout his/her stupidity and has to deal with equally or worse responses. You have a choice how anonymous you want to be. The problem is that most people don’t understand how public those boards really are and how the anonymity of those can be missused. Jumping in the shitpile and complaining about the stink afterwards strikes me as rather shortsighted.

50. I stopped playing games online. The cheating and abuse has gotten ridiculous. I have been abused growing up, and I simply won’t take any more.

    I hope these ‘gamers’ who do this realize that if they push everyone out, there won’t be any games for anyone, ever. They are cutting off their own noses to spite their faces.

Comments are closed.