safety policy so easy

[golyadkin 61]

safety policy so easy

t. mr frill 08/12

 

Hi I'm permanently banned player Frill. In my big rap sheet of Minecraft terrors, I was harassment banned for six months two years ago for posting the same stuff that Sorcerio recently posted about. In fact, I even used the same images! Wowee.

 

James2k commented something really presient on the thread and dropped my name enough that some people stirred me from my slumbers to actually have a look at this situation.

 

Quote

A start would be an apology to Frill and all the others who were silenced and punished for starting this crusade before the rest of you decided it was convenient for your own goals, and the Admin Team felt enough heat to finally do something about it. The next thing would be to develop consistent policies about this so this doesn't happen again.

 

An apology isn't necessary; I'm still a banned player and the administration dislikes me enough that they won't budge on that one. That's all okay, I'm not really missing much by not being able to dress up as an elf on Minecraft - but not having a consistent policy where this doesn't happen again certainly isn't okay. So, uh, I've taken some time out of my day to write one.

 

The current reactive policy is very damaging and alienating; it requires a smoking gun of no uncertain doubt that damage has already been caused before issues may be investigated, making raising concerns a very traumatising and difficult process that people have, and do, tend to avoid due to the fact that not having this avalanche to guarantee absolute certainty will mean that their problems won't be investigated at all, let alone result in some actual change. Having retroactive resolution instead of proactive prevention is fine for things like broken blocks or random-killing, where you can roll back inventories and restore broken blocks, but requiring proof of actual harm to the off-screen person before something can be investigated is a lot more damaging to both the admin's reputation as stewards of a community and the player themselves. One of the things that took Flambo so long to get banned was that the person reporting him kept asking for reassurances that they wouldn't get banned themselves for reporting it (this was, annoyingly, all through LotsofMuffins too, but the less said about that the better !).

 

There have been enough bad smells about certain players for so long that investigation should've been prompted long before longform screeds are published in the forums and the current approach really doesn't work. The rules are all roleplay and server-mechanic centric and, uh, like Llir said; the staff are all kids and volunteers, they don't have a robustness of expertise to know how to handle pastoral stuff like this with silk gloves.I sent this to Llir and Telanir and they've said they're working on something. I don't know what that means in terms of quality or quantity, so I figured I'd throw this out anyway.

 

So yeah,

 

I'm permabanned user Frill and I'm so disappointed in how things have been handled I've gone ahead and took some time out of my day to write a safeguarding policy for a community I have long been removed from to use. The only change is, really, that it means one admin has to take some responsibilities for actually handling and investigating these things before they happen. Yeah, that does mean in some cases (v. rarely I add) that you talk to real world authorities, but for the most part it's just about being open and approachable.

 

Feel free to give me some feedback about what you think of this system; the only issue I really see is that a lot of staff really don't have much knowledge about safeguarding stuff, so the little draft I've been chucking around has an audit of staff knowledge to see how well they'd handle certain scenarios, as well as checking for knowledge of processes and so on.

 

I don't think this thread'll be up for long, but hey, I don't see anyone not permanently banned from the community for toxicity  drafting one of these.

 

cheers,

 

frill xox

 

---

 

 

 

 

LoTC Digital Safeguarding Policy

Written by mr frill :)

 

STATEMENT

 

This policy applies to all staff-members and players within the community. Looking after the community and promoting safeguarding is defined as; 

 

• Protecting players from maltreatment, 

• Preventing impairment of their mental or physical wellbeing, 

• Ensuring that the community is a place of safe and effective care towards serious issues.

 

The server must uphold a culture of proactive safety where raising concerns is the first necessary step, so that every player may feel safe, understood, and protected from abuse before it may occur. 

 

Previous measures focused on an evidentiary basis, necessitating a retroactive approach where harm would have already needed to have occurred - and sufficiently proven to have occurred - for a player to be listened to.

 

This player-centred and coordinated approach understands that every staff-member that comes into contact with a player has a role to play in both identifying and remediating concerns, sharing any information provided by players and taking sufficient and prompt action by raising it with senior members of staff. Fears about places in staff-teams, social groups, and other concerns against the sharing of information must not be allowed to stand in the way of safeguarding players and protecting the safety of the community.

 

Lord of the Craft SAFEGUARDING PRINCIPLES AND COMMITMENTS

 

The server can condense its principles and commitments into six concise points. These are not exhaustive.

 

Keep clear and detailed records.

Never make assumptions,

Always share information.

Do not be afraid to challenge decisions.

Clear, concise and consistent communication.

Be proactive and prevent harm before it can arise.

 

BEHAVIOURS OF CONCERN

 

This is a non-exhaustive list of examples of behaviours of concern that will, and previously have, pose safeguarding issues within the community.

 

Harassment

 

Doxing 

Doxing is the sharing or personal or private information that a player has not released themselves. This includes real name, email address, IP address, and any other information that can be used to personally identify a player outside of the server. Players may sometimes share this information between friends or the community, whether it is a picture of themselves or information concerning their real-life  location. It is a common tactic to harass players by using this information for ridicule or other, more serious, purposes. If a player reveals something unknowingly sensitive, it is important to remind them of the possible consequences of a bad actor finding this information.

 

Direct Harassment

Slurs, blackmail, general insults and threats are the most common forms of direct harassment. It is a common tactic for players that dislike each-other to use surface-level details about a person's appearance, personality, sexuality or social groups to try to insult somebody. This is sometimes disguised with humour as to prevent removal from a community that the player is in. 

 

Deceptive Practices

It happens that information is outright fabricated against an individual, especially on the internet. People often create lies, either to defend their own actions or to blacken the name of another individual while posing it as truth to the community. Rumours and stories shift the perception that players have of each-other.

 

Grooming

Emotional blackmail

Using blatant or implied threats to make demands of another person, often implying that one would suffer an adverse effect if they don't get what they want. This may also count outright threats against the self.

 

Familiarity boundaries

Pressuring those familiar or friendly to reveal or do something questionable due to believing they have an adequate level of familiarity to allow the behaviour. Players may make statements or do things they may not otherwise do if they assume they are in a 'safe and friendly' surrounding.

 

Character boundaries

Players often project themselves onto their characters and those seeking to abuse this may use character relations to coerce people out-of-character. This may be an in-character romance, having a higher political or social position, or threatening roleplay consequences for not doing out-of-character actions.

 

Covering tracks

It should be noted that those engaging in inappropriate behaviour may try to mask their culpability by mentioning age. By focusing on age of consent and checking for whether or not they have reached sexual maturity, they reinforce that the player isn't suspicious or engaging in predatory behaviour as they are 'aware' it would be inapproriate. However, it is a sign that they are willing to engage in talking about things of a sexual nature and are cognizant of the consequences of doing so.

 

Inappropriately sexual conversation

Conversations will often be sexual in nature when dealing with certain predatory players. Sexting (sending sexually explicit images of onself) is frequent. This is usually paired with the previous signs to threaten or coerce reciprocation.

 

 

Digital Safeguarding

 

WHISTLEBLOWING & REPORTING PROCEDURES

 

Whistleblowing is sometimes called 'speaking up' or commonly thought of as reporting problematic circumstances or players. It is all about raising an issue if you see something that is wrong. It is not publicising an issue or broadcasting it to a wider community, but instead reporting it to the right people - within Lord of the Craft or outside of it. This protects everyone within the community by identifying harm early so action can be taken.

 

If you're worried about the safety or wellbeing of yourself or another member of the community, you need to contact a moderation manager; this is  a person in a senior place within  the community that  takes responsibility for protection issues within the community. If you don't know who to speak to, or you feel like this contact is abusive in-of-themself, there are regional and national services that you can contact.

 

There is no need to have proof of abuse or harm before you make your report - a suspicion is enough to prompt an investigation, especially as visible 'evidence' may only appear after harm has been caused. The best approach to harm is one that is self-consciously proactive.

 

It is very easy to believe that a report hasn't been dealt with. This might make you feel worried that the server is not taking safeguarding seriously.

 

This could happen if; 

 

• You don't think the community staff are following safeguarding procedures, or you feel like they're inadequate. 

• You feel ignored by staff. 

• The problem is occurring after the report. 

• Your worries have increased in severity or there is an increased risk of harm. 

• You are worried about being treated unfairly for raising the concern. 

 

You will need to consider what other actions you can take and whether internal or external whistleblowing is your next port of call.

 

You can: 

 

• Ask the person you reported to for an update.

• Escalate the worry to someone more senior, such as an administrator.

• Look at the community's policy to see who else you can report to externally.

 

If you are worried that the server is not taking safeguarding seriously, or acting unethically, you can consider telling an external group. You must make sure that you have chosen the correct organisation for your issue, especially as they have a legal obligation to investigate cases.

 

It is not acceptable for anyone to be victimised for reporting a safeguarding issue. Unfortunately, it does still happen. If you feel victimised following raising concerns then tell the server administration. Though it may be uncomfortable, the server has procedures and infraction systems in place to solve these issues as necessary. Somebody who claims they are being harassed or intimidated after making a report must always be taken seriously.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE SAFEGUARDING LEAD

 

The administration appoints one member to handle all safeguarding issues. This administrator is the least likely to have roleplay and community obligations and instead having a complete safeguarding picture. Having somebody of responsibility while also being removed from the internal community politics are the most appropriate people to advise any response regarding safeguarding concerns.

 

Players are welcome to approach this person if they have any concern about their welfare or that of fellow players within the community. If preferred, they may discuss this through moderation and they will notify this administrator in accordance with procedure.

 

Responsibilities

 

The main responsibilities of this person are;

 

to be the first point of contact for all matters of player safety;

 

to coordinate with moderation for procedures in day-to-day running of the server;

 

to determine the response to the concern raised by a player from the community, considering the context of the players involved and any know history (known as contextual safeguarding);

 

to ensure all staff have adequate understanding of the policy;

 

to support and enable staff and players in the community to raise concerns and to promote a proactive  culture of safety;

 

to monitor the keeping and storage of any records that may relate to player safety;

 

In extreme cases, alerting real-world authorities when necessary. This includes providing them with any and all information that may possibly be requested, with the implication that they either have access to this information or will be provided it if requested;

 

to keep players informed of any action taken.

 

 

 

SAFEGUARDING POLICY

 

Procedures for reporting abuse

 

All members of staff, regardless of team or level of responsibility, must;

 

RECEIVE the information - they must listen carefully to any report, no matter how it is raised, and keep  an open mind. They should not question whether or not the event has taken place and be aware of tone of responses to somebody reporting to them;

 

• Must not ask questions that lead to or suggest an answer;

 

• Must not stop a member of the community who is freely recalling the events;

 

• Keep responses short, simple, polite and considerate of the trust placed in them as a staff-member having this information reported to them.

 

REASSURE the person reporting that they have done the right thing by reporting this instead of chastising them for circumstances around the abuse. Previous abuse within the community took far longer than necessary to come to light due to concern that the person reporting it would be punished should there be no action taken.

 

You cannot promise confidentiality. It will need to be explained in no uncertain or ambiguous terms that the information will be shared between administration to ensure correct action will be taken.  Any concern from the reporting party may be assuaged by being transparent about who the information is being shared with, why it is being shared with them (an explanation of this person as a relevant party or authority) and the overall progress of the report.

 

RECORD - Staff must keep a verbatim record of any conversation made regarding a safeguarding issue. This should include the date, time and method of communication used as well as a summary of what was said and done by whom. This record must be signed by whoever recorded it, using full names instead of initialisms. This record must be submitted to the administration as soon as possible so advice may be given quickly about next steps.

 

REPORT - Staff would normally inform their manager or team admin, however they are reminded that any member of staff may refer it to external, real-world authorities if the issue is severe enough.

 

 

Procedures and recording evidence

 

All evidence must be recorded and preserved in a folder that is passed to administration.

 

Reporting

 

All suspicion or complaints of any abusive behaviour must be reported to administration. If the complaint involves a fellow staff-member, to the admin of their respective team.

 

Action by Administration

 

Administration will either remove the player from the community or contact external authorities in cases of extreme circumstance. In the event that it is a minor issue not requiring safeguarding intervention, it will be delegated to moderation for infractions to be issued accordingly.

 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/digital-resilience-framework

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/safeguarding-children-and-protecting-professionals-in-early-years-settings-online-safety-considerations

https://www.elearning.prevent.homeoffice.gov.uk/auth/login

https://www.london.gov.uk/city-hall-blog/checklist-digital-safeguarding

https://www.unicef.org.uk/child-friendly-cities/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/05/Safeguarding-and-digital-engagement-guidance-Child-Friendly-Cities-and-Communities-Unicef-UK.pdf

 

[ hey, so because Tythus is based in the UK and my own familiarities irl, I've only linked UK-centric material here. feel free to add some.]

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by golyadkin
formatting i pasted from a google doc sorry

[Narthok 9213]

I agree with frill this is an excellent post. I can't believe it takes a banned player to write this!

[sergisala 2794]

hello frill long time no see

[Collectivist 3]

after reading this whole thing so true glad someone said it!!

[warlord of filth 7714]

respect king. 

[Toffee 1070]

Wow, this is very professionally written, clear, and comprehensive—excellent job. There is no doubt that the Staff Team should implement something similar to this to have a clear roadmap of steps to take in these situations, which I'm sure they're working on as we speak.

 

My only question is if you think a "Safety Team" or player safety point of contact should be within the Administration or if it should be a separate entity? I freely admit that I don't know all of the background information, but it seems as though there have been some issues in the past where staff members, the people who players are supposed to approach with these issues and trust that they'll be resolved, have actually been the perpetrators who are then protected by their status/position. I don't say this to cast any aspersions on the current Admin Team or staff in general, but as a genuine question for if these policies can or should be implemented by staff or if they should be separate. 

 

Furthermore, I think anyone dealing with player safety (furthermore, child safety) should be required to be police checked. 

(P.S. I know I'm one of like 3 New Zealanders on the internet but here is a NZ resource for digital child exploitation and here is the Australian eSafety Commission website. Protect yourself people—there are resources out there to help you. You are not alone).

[argonian 12837]

he says he meant sorcerio not suicidium btw

[Slorbin 1773]

why isnt he unbanned

[golyadkin 61]

2 hours ago, Toffee said:

My only question is if you think a "Safety Team" or player safety point of contact should be within the Administration or if it should be a separate entity? I freely admit that I don't know all of the background information, but it seems as though there have been some issues in the past where staff members, the people who players are supposed to approach with these issues and trust that they'll be resolved, have actually been the perpetrators who are then protected by their status/position. I don't say this to cast any aspersions on the current Admin Team or staff in general, but as a genuine question for if these policies can or should be implemented by staff or if they should be separate.

 

I think the issue at the moment is that there is nobody wholly suited to looking after the community in a pastoral capacity.

 

In my halcyon caring dreamworld there would be an administrator (loath me if you wish, but ideally Telanir or Tythus) with some dedication to continued professional development where they'd be using their own time, or if necessary, self-funding courses etc. in online safety and general safeguarding.

 

There becomes a point where you can't rest on the false laurel of childish naivite if an issue is recurrent enough throughout a disdended tenure that people are joking about how you handle things; you need to pick up your reins and start handling things with some professionalism. LOTC exists as a legal entity, even if it's just on paper, and the actual player-safety issues need to be treated handled with resolutions that aren't word-heavy action-light forum blog-posts by a scrappy team of puckish young volunteers "not doing the best, but doing their best ;3".

 

Admins are actually.. relatively okay with policing child grooming stuff among their own, but it is again the notion of overwhelming evidence requiring a sudden (and dramatic peanut-gallery public) ousting being the par for the course for LoTC; there are atm no procedures in place to report concerns about behaviour of anyone, administration included, to prompt investigation. Flamboyant, for one, would have left a lot earlier than he did if there were proactive measures in place. How these guys get admin in the first place? I suppose they don't wear their predelicitions on their wrists. Everyone could've pointed to these past weirdos as not nice people, but the gavel fell hard and sharp when they started straying past safeguarding red flags.

 

2 hours ago, Toffee said:

Furthermore, I think anyone dealing with player safety (furthermore, child safety) should be required to be police checked.

 

This is a great idea on paper; but uh, a lot of the behaviours that would be concerning from a player or administrator can easily pass a police check. I can name (but won't!) three similarly permabanned players like myself who have started enough on government / education / policing careers that they have had stringent background checks.

 

Cross-border compatibility may be an issue, too. Although some countries do share things for active police checks, there are things that don't necessarily transfer, so don't quite provide a complete picture of an individual's record / be wholly compatible. Certificates for good conduct all vary country to country and don't have equal levels of depth.

 

But the biggie? Most unwanted and very much bannable behaviour may be morally repugnant but it isn't de jure illegal, so won't be flagged regardless. With the weight on social reputation and perceived in-community moral character, too, there is no one way to properly vet somebody and have sweeping across-the-board trust for a position like this. But if they can prove dedication to self-improvement and continued development with the idea that, okay, this is a formal capacity that requires some learning, skills and reputability? They can earn that trust very easily. I suppose having a disclosure and barring service check come back clean is something they can wave about just to say they have, though.

 

28 minutes ago, Slorbin said:

why isnt he unbanned

 

No, I really should stay banned. I am not a nice bloke!

[Oridfrai 24]

6 hours ago, golyadkin said:

safety policy so easy

t. mr frill 08/12

 

Hi I'm permanently banned player Frill. In my big rap sheet of Minecraft terrors, I was harassment banned for six months two years ago for posting the same stuff that Sorcerio recently posted about. In fact, I even used the same images! Wowee.

 

James2k commented something really presient on the thread and dropped my name enough that some people stirred me from my slumbers to actually have a look at this situation.

 

 

An apology isn't necessary; I'm still a banned player and the administration dislikes me enough that they won't budge on that one. That's all okay, I'm not really missing much by not being able to dress up as an elf on Minecraft - but not having a consistent policy where this doesn't happen again certainly isn't okay. So, uh, I've taken some time out of my day to write one.

 

The current reactive policy is very damaging and alienating; it requires a smoking gun of no uncertain doubt that damage has already been caused before issues may be investigated, making raising concerns a very traumatising and difficult process that people have, and do, tend to avoid due to the fact that not having this avalanche to guarantee absolute certainty will mean that their problems won't be investigated at all, let alone result in some actual change. Having retroactive resolution instead of proactive prevention is fine for things like broken blocks or random-killing, where you can roll back inventories and restore broken blocks, but requiring proof of actual harm to the off-screen person before something can be investigated is a lot more damaging to both the admin's reputation as stewards of a community and the player themselves. One of the things that took Flambo so long to get banned was that the person reporting him kept asking for reassurances that they wouldn't get banned themselves for reporting it (this was, annoyingly, all through LotsofMuffins too, but the less said about that the better !).

 

There have been enough bad smells about certain players for so long that investigation should've been prompted long before longform screeds are published in the forums and the current approach really doesn't work. The rules are all roleplay and server-mechanic centric and, uh, like Llir said; the staff are all kids and volunteers, they don't have a robustness of expertise to know how to handle pastoral stuff like this with silk gloves.I sent this to Llir and Telanir and they've said they're working on something. I don't know what that means in terms of quality or quantity, so I figured I'd throw this out anyway.

 

So yeah,

 

I'm permabanned user Frill and I'm so disappointed in how things have been handled I've gone ahead and took some time out of my day to write a safeguarding policy for a community I have long been removed from to use. The only change is, really, that it means one admin has to take some responsibilities for actually handling and investigating these things before they happen. Yeah, that does mean in some cases (v. rarely I add) that you talk to real world authorities, but for the most part it's just about being open and approachable.

 

Feel free to give me some feedback about what you think of this system; the only issue I really see is that a lot of staff really don't have much knowledge about safeguarding stuff, so the little draft I've been chucking around has an audit of staff knowledge to see how well they'd handle certain scenarios, as well as checking for knowledge of processes and so on.

 

I don't think this thread'll be up for long, but hey, I don't see anyone not permanently banned from the community for toxicity  drafting one of these.

 

cheers,

 

frill xox

 

---

 

 

 

 

LoTC Digital Safeguarding Policy

Written by mr frill :)

 

STATEMENT

 

This policy applies to all staff-members and players within the community. Looking after the community and promoting safeguarding is defined as; 

 

• Protecting players from maltreatment, 

• Preventing impairment of their mental or physical wellbeing, 

• Ensuring that the community is a place of safe and effective care towards serious issues.

 

The server must uphold a culture of proactive safety where raising concerns is the first necessary step, so that every player may feel safe, understood, and protected from abuse before it may occur. 

 

Previous measures focused on an evidentiary basis, necessitating a retroactive approach where harm would have already needed to have occurred - and sufficiently proven to have occurred - for a player to be listened to.

 

This player-centred and coordinated approach understands that every staff-member that comes into contact with a player has a role to play in both identifying and remediating concerns, sharing any information provided by players and taking sufficient and prompt action by raising it with senior members of staff. Fears about places in staff-teams, social groups, and other concerns against the sharing of information must not be allowed to stand in the way of safeguarding players and protecting the safety of the community.

 

Lord of the Craft SAFEGUARDING PRINCIPLES AND COMMITMENTS

 

The server can condense its principles and commitments into six concise points. These are not exhaustive.

 

Keep clear and detailed records.

Never make assumptions,

Always share information.

Do not be afraid to challenge decisions.

Clear, concise and consistent communication.

Be proactive and prevent harm before it can arise.

 

BEHAVIOURS OF CONCERN

 

This is a non-exhaustive list of examples of behaviours of concern that will, and previously have, pose safeguarding issues within the community.

 

Harassment

 

Doxing 

Doxing is the sharing or personal or private information that a player has not released themselves. This includes real name, email address, IP address, and any other information that can be used to personally identify a player outside of the server. Players may sometimes share this information between friends or the community, whether it is a picture of themselves or information concerning their real-life  location. It is a common tactic to harass players by using this information for ridicule or other, more serious, purposes. If a player reveals something unknowingly sensitive, it is important to remind them of the possible consequences of a bad actor finding this information.

 

Direct Harassment

Slurs, blackmail, general insults and threats are the most common forms of direct harassment. It is a common tactic for players that dislike each-other to use surface-level details about a person's appearance, personality, sexuality or social groups to try to insult somebody. This is sometimes disguised with humour as to prevent removal from a community that the player is in. 

 

Deceptive Practices

It happens that information is outright fabricated against an individual, especially on the internet. People often create lies, either to defend their own actions or to blacken the name of another individual while posing it as truth to the community. Rumours and stories shift the perception that players have of each-other.

 

Grooming

Emotional blackmail

Using blatant or implied threats to make demands of another person, often implying that one would suffer an adverse effect if they don't get what they want. This may also count outright threats against the self.

 

Familiarity boundaries

Pressuring those familiar or friendly to reveal or do something questionable due to believing they have an adequate level of familiarity to allow the behaviour. Players may make statements or do things they may not otherwise do if they assume they are in a 'safe and friendly' surrounding.

 

Character boundaries

Players often project themselves onto their characters and those seeking to abuse this may use character relations to coerce people out-of-character. This may be an in-character romance, having a higher political or social position, or threatening roleplay consequences for not doing out-of-character actions.

 

Covering tracks

It should be noted that those engaging in inappropriate behaviour may try to mask their culpability by mentioning age. By focusing on age of consent and checking for whether or not they have reached sexual maturity, they reinforce that the player isn't suspicious or engaging in predatory behaviour as they are 'aware' it would be inapproriate. However, it is a sign that they are willing to engage in talking about things of a sexual nature and are cognizant of the consequences of doing so.

 

Inappropriately sexual conversation

Conversations will often be sexual in nature when dealing with certain predatory players. Sexting (sending sexually explicit images of onself) is frequent. This is usually paired with the previous signs to threaten or coerce reciprocation.

 

 

Digital Safeguarding

 

WHISTLEBLOWING & REPORTING PROCEDURES

 

Whistleblowing is sometimes called 'speaking up' or commonly thought of as reporting problematic circumstances or players. It is all about raising an issue if you see something that is wrong. It is not publicising an issue or broadcasting it to a wider community, but instead reporting it to the right people - within Lord of the Craft or outside of it. This protects everyone within the community by identifying harm early so action can be taken.

 

If you're worried about the safety or wellbeing of yourself or another member of the community, you need to contact a moderation manager; this is  a person in a senior place within  the community that  takes responsibility for protection issues within the community. If you don't know who to speak to, or you feel like this contact is abusive in-of-themself, there are regional and national services that you can contact.

 

There is no need to have proof of abuse or harm before you make your report - a suspicion is enough to prompt an investigation, especially as visible 'evidence' may only appear after harm has been caused. The best approach to harm is one that is self-consciously proactive.

 

It is very easy to believe that a report hasn't been dealt with. This might make you feel worried that the server is not taking safeguarding seriously.

 

This could happen if; 

 

• You don't think the community staff are following safeguarding procedures, or you feel like they're inadequate. 

• You feel ignored by staff. 

• The problem is occurring after the report. 

• Your worries have increased in severity or there is an increased risk of harm. 

• You are worried about being treated unfairly for raising the concern. 

 

You will need to consider what other actions you can take and whether internal or external whistleblowing is your next port of call.

 

You can: 

 

• Ask the person you reported to for an update.

• Escalate the worry to someone more senior, such as an administrator.

• Look at the community's policy to see who else you can report to externally.

 

If you are worried that the server is not taking safeguarding seriously, or acting unethically, you can consider telling an external group. You must make sure that you have chosen the correct organisation for your issue, especially as they have a legal obligation to investigate cases.

 

It is not acceptable for anyone to be victimised for reporting a safeguarding issue. Unfortunately, it does still happen. If you feel victimised following raising concerns then tell the server administration. Though it may be uncomfortable, the server has procedures and infraction systems in place to solve these issues as necessary. Somebody who claims they are being harassed or intimidated after making a report must always be taken seriously.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE SAFEGUARDING LEAD

 

The administration appoints one member to handle all safeguarding issues. This administrator is the least likely to have roleplay and community obligations and instead having a complete safeguarding picture. Having somebody of responsibility while also being removed from the internal community politics are the most appropriate people to advise any response regarding safeguarding concerns.

 

Players are welcome to approach this person if they have any concern about their welfare or that of fellow players within the community. If preferred, they may discuss this through moderation and they will notify this administrator in accordance with procedure.

 

Responsibilities

 

The main responsibilities of this person are;

 

to be the first point of contact for all matters of player safety;

 

to coordinate with moderation for procedures in day-to-day running of the server;

 

to determine the response to the concern raised by a player from the community, considering the context of the players involved and any know history (known as contextual safeguarding);

 

to ensure all staff have adequate understanding of the policy;

 

to support and enable staff and players in the community to raise concerns and to promote a proactive  culture of safety;

 

to monitor the keeping and storage of any records that may relate to player safety;

 

In extreme cases, alerting real-world authorities when necessary. This includes providing them with any and all information that may possibly be requested, with the implication that they either have access to this information or will be provided it if requested;

 

to keep players informed of any action taken.

 

 

 

SAFEGUARDING POLICY

 

Procedures for reporting abuse

 

All members of staff, regardless of team or level of responsibility, must;

 

RECEIVE the information - they must listen carefully to any report, no matter how it is raised, and keep  an open mind. They should not question whether or not the event has taken place and be aware of tone of responses to somebody reporting to them;

 

• Must not ask questions that lead to or suggest an answer;

 

• Must not stop a member of the community who is freely recalling the events;

 

• Keep responses short, simple, polite and considerate of the trust placed in them as a staff-member having this information reported to them.

 

REASSURE the person reporting that they have done the right thing by reporting this instead of chastising them for circumstances around the abuse. Previous abuse within the community took far longer than necessary to come to light due to concern that the person reporting it would be punished should there be no action taken.

 

You cannot promise confidentiality. It will need to be explained in no uncertain or ambiguous terms that the information will be shared between administration to ensure correct action will be taken.  Any concern from the reporting party may be assuaged by being transparent about who the information is being shared with, why it is being shared with them (an explanation of this person as a relevant party or authority) and the overall progress of the report.

 

RECORD - Staff must keep a verbatim record of any conversation made regarding a safeguarding issue. This should include the date, time and method of communication used as well as a summary of what was said and done by whom. This record must be signed by whoever recorded it, using full names instead of initialisms. This record must be submitted to the administration as soon as possible so advice may be given quickly about next steps.

 

REPORT - Staff would normally inform their manager or team admin, however they are reminded that any member of staff may refer it to external, real-world authorities if the issue is severe enough.

 

 

Procedures and recording evidence

 

All evidence must be recorded and preserved in a folder that is passed to administration.

 

Reporting

 

All suspicion or complaints of any abusive behaviour must be reported to administration. If the complaint involves a fellow staff-member, to the admin of their respective team.

 

Action by Administration

 

Administration will either remove the player from the community or contact external authorities in cases of extreme circumstance. In the event that it is a minor issue not requiring safeguarding intervention, it will be delegated to moderation for infractions to be issued accordingly.

 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/digital-resilience-framework

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/safeguarding-children-and-protecting-professionals-in-early-years-settings-online-safety-considerations

https://www.elearning.prevent.homeoffice.gov.uk/auth/login

https://www.london.gov.uk/city-hall-blog/checklist-digital-safeguarding

https://www.unicef.org.uk/child-friendly-cities/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/05/Safeguarding-and-digital-engagement-guidance-Child-Friendly-Cities-and-Communities-Unicef-UK.pdf

 

[ hey, so because Tythus is based in the UK and my own familiarities irl, I've only linked UK-centric material here. feel free to add some.]

 

I'll post some criminal legislation for you if it ever came to the part where we genuinely feel this is no longer something we can handle in game or as a community. 

United Kingdom:

 

Sexual Offences Act 2003

Sexual Offences Act 2003 Section 12: Causing a child to watch sexual acts

[https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/12]

Sexual Offences Act 2003 Section 15.A: Sexual Communication with a child.
[https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/15A]

*If the adult doesn’t reasonably believe the person is 16 or over (for example the person states they are under 16) then this is a criminal offence.* This is stated under said act.

Sexual Offences Act 2003 Section 33: Causing a person with a mental disorder impeding consent and choice to watch a sexual act.

[https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/33]

 

In the US I know a person younger than the legal age of consent cannot legally consent to sexual activity. The age of consent in the United States ranges from 16 to 18 years old depending on the state. There is no way a minor (13 - 15) should be interacting in a sexual manner however you as an adult needs to realise what is going on and shut it down. It's a no go area for you.

I can only do UK law since it's only one I'm well versed in but I shall continue to do research for other European countries.

 

 

 

[gavyn 855]

I like this very much! Thank you, Sir Frilliam

[MapleSunflower 1049]

9 hours ago, Toffee said:

My only question is if you think a "Safety Team" or player safety point of contact should be within the Administration or if it should be a separate entity? I freely admit that I don't know all of the background information, but it seems as though there have been some issues in the past where staff members, the people who players are supposed to approach with these issues and trust that they'll be resolved, have actually been the perpetrators who are then protected by their status/position. I don't say this to cast any aspersions on the current Admin Team or staff in general, but as a genuine question for if these policies can or should be implemented by staff or if they should be separate. 

 

Furthermore, I think anyone dealing with player safety (furthermore, child safety) should be required to be police checked. 

I agree that whomever is chosen for this job should be police checked. However, this will only weed out a few few amount of people, but it’s worth the shot. 

 

Most perpetrators are not registered as sex offenders/sexual harassers or have any criminal records. It would also be a concern of having them put out their info for another admin, but i don’t know how close the admins are about that stuff and all. But for whomever is chosen will have to give information about themselves and may not feel comfortable with that. 
 

It’s a good step to implement, though. 

It’s better to do something like this, just in case. 

 

 

Otherwise, beautifully well written post. Easy to read and understand for someone who struggles to read and understand readings like me, professionally written, and I hope that the admins will look at this and take it into consideration. Even if they don’t, having the definitions and consequences listed out so that someone isn’t suddenly shocked by them when they’re caught. No excuses.

[argonian 12837]

3 minutes ago, MapleSunflower said:

Otherwise, beautifully well written post. Easy to read and understand for someone who struggles to read and understand readings like me, professionally written, and I hope that the admins will look at this and take it into consideration. Even if they don’t, having the definitions and consequences listed out so that someone isn’t suddenly shocked by them when they’re caught. No excuses.

Frill says he would reply but he's been forumbanned again lol

[Proddy 2246]

didn’t read it but nice one 

[Werew0lf 12021]

frill groomed me