Has an IFRB rating system ever been discussed?

Playing Getting Started Playing IF
41

Nobody said sex was bad. But it’s a deciding factor in whether some people would want to play a particular game. For my purposes, I wouldn’t let my 8-year-old play something by Anna Anthropy (well, probably most somethings). By marking the designation but not the age in a rating system, it would inform a person what to expect without making guesses as to whether or not that particular person is inclined to avoid it – at any age.

For me personally, yes, “appropriate for children” or “not appropriate for children” would be fine. But I’m not everyone. I think some kind of rating system, if done well and thought out fully (as we’re doing now) would be helpful.

42

DO NOT use G/PG/PG13/R etc. The lawsuit-happy MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) has trademarked these ratings and has a history of threatening legal action against anyone who uses them without their authorization. (Both fanfiction.net and Linden Lab had to change their rating systems as the result of such threats).

43

I see that you feel strongly here, but I will have to disagree with you. Strongly.

Pretend for a moment that half of the IF community is severely arachnophobic. Encountering a spider in a game will upset them severely. Also, some non-arachnophobes have arachnophobic children, or worry that their children may become arachnophobic.

Consequently, there is a strong movement to include “contains spiders” as a rating.

For the purpose of this example, you are not arachnophobic, and I am not arachnophobic. In fact, we both have pet tarantulas and take them for walkies on a daily basis. Plainly, we don’t need a “contains spiders” warning label. In fact, we might agree that this is silly, and everyone should just get over their arachnophobia.

Does our opinion matter here? Frankly: no, it does not. We’re talking about a tool to benefit the community.

If a significant proportion of the community wants to know whether spiders are in a game, and we leave out “contains spiders” in a tool that is specifically intended to educate players about the content in a game, then the tool is not serving its purpose to the community.

44

Worth knowing, thanks!

45

While I’m not proposing this system, it’s worth thinking about the warning conventions used by fanfic authors. E.g archiveofourown.org/tos#IV.K.

This is a community where writing about sex is absolutely accepted and common. They still have use for a “general/teen/mature/explicit” flag plus specific warnings for content that’s likely to bother some people.

46

Quick note: on the AGS site, upon release, the author has to cathegorise his game as regards to sex, violence and profanity, and is given drop-down choices from “none” to “intense”. This could maybe be a compulsory field for new games to be added, and something to be filled in for existing games.

I personally dislike rating systems in most of their incarnations the same way I dislike general cathegorisation of works which become lessened by their cathegorisation, but I certainly see the merits, and cvaneseltine certainly made an eloquent point.

47

I’m with Victor on the sex issue. The spiders analogy doesn’t work for me - we’re not talking about a phobia here, we’re talking about people being embarrassed by what defines us, and that’s something we need to move on from as a society.

48

This analogy is completely unconvincing to me. Fear of spiders takes the form an irrational, instinctive, physical response. For that very reason, it is not something that fiction can interestingly explore, and not something which will or will not trigger negative responses based on how sensitively the author handles the material. Art will not help me in confronting my fear of spiders, and the artist cannot forestall my being frightened by handling spiders with understanding and subtlety.

So, sure, if there were a lot of people who would react with immediate physical panic to the mere mentioning of spiders (this is of course a fictional situation), then a spider warning would be highly appropriate. It’s like the epilepsy warning that comes with some games or films. I have nothing against that.

But the analogy breaks down immediately. There is not a “significant portion of the community” who respond with immediate physical panic to sentences like “Then Mary and Tom made love to each other.” So there is no reason analogous to that of the spider case to warn people about the appearance of sex in a story. But there are all the reasons I gave above to fight against rating systems as tools of censorship, dubious ideology, and consumerist attitude towards art.

49

By the way, Carolyn: yes, I do feel very strongly about this. After reading this thread, I had a physical feeling of dread in my stomach (I still have it a bit), dread that what I perceive as the evil of rating systems would taint the IF community. I acknowledge that you feel very strongly about it the other way – I hope to be able to come to a point where I understand from what perspective you’re looking at it, even though I’m not there yet – and I appreciate the reasonableness and civility of your response. I trust I’ll be able to respond in the same spirit, in the hope of convincing or, more likely, at least understanding each other.

50

I’d be very much in favour of taking a book-like approach rather than a film/games approach, but books definitely go through a filtering and classification process that makes it easier to select age-appropriate materials. (It’s a much less explicit system than music, movies or games, and probably a much less strict one - which is all to the good, I think - but it’s largely genre-based, and since IF isn’t a big enough pool to really differentiate by genre, this may not be a model that we can readily avail ourselves of.)

Broadly speaking I’m in the same boat, but it’s probably an important consideration that most of the actual depictions of sex in the IF that actually exists are either fap-material, or otherwise rely on some informed understanding of fap-material. I’m pretty happy with letting people know when they’re likely to encounter that. If we had a robust tradition of serious sexual content, I’d feel a lot better about defending this point. (This is probably a separate argument, though.)

My take is that it’s not my position to tell people what material is suitable for their kids, but equally, I don’t have any moral duty to assist parents in the implementation of those choices. It’s considerate of me to do so, and if there are tools that make it simple and straightforward for me to be considerate, that’s good.

If they’re mandatory, I completely agree. So I suppose that my basic position is that opt-in system > no system > opt-out system > mandatory system.

51

That’s such a mild example that I’d likely shrug over that one, myself. I feel like it’s comparable to “I hear you murdered Frank” for violence, or “A ghost shouts ‘Boo!’” for horror.

In looking for a better example, I discovered today that the AIF types are less inclined to post transcripts than Club Floyd. Fortunately, the source code for Bob’s Garage was available, saving me from an awkward trawl through the best of the Erins. From this game’s source code:

Carry out rubbing Tiffany's pussy: if Double-Team Blowjob has not happened or Double-Team Blowjob ended sadly begin; say "You stroke your hand down over Tiffany's body, enjoying the feeling of her firm flesh under her dress. Over her stomach and along her hip, your fingers trace her figure. You come to the juncture of her legs, and can feel the heat from her pussy through her dress. Pressing inwards, you gently stroke her. Tiffany moans, at first pushing back against you. When you slide your fingers downward, reaching for the hem of her dress, however, she grasps your hand. 'Not right now,' she says gently, moving your hand.";

There are more involved "otherwise"s attached, but I’d feel super awkward posting anything more from the source, so I’m going to hope my point is clear (and if not, may I invite you to check the source yourself?)

The AIF crowd is releasing games that are incredibly explicit, and many of their games are available on the IFDB. This game is appropriately marked “adult” at ifwiki.org/index.php/Bob%27s_Garage, and that means no one will get blindsided by the content*.

Having clear labels on these games is a good thing.

[size=85]* Also, a quick kudos to A. Bomire for including a content warning at the top of Bob’s Garage. As I mentioned, I think this is the best option, but it’s not enforceable.[/size]

52

I also appreciate that we can come from different perspectives and talk about this with mutual respect.

53

dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic … UBNEY.html
There have been a number of articles like this recently.

I don’t think the mention of sex is bad. I think my parents taught me the mechanics of where babies come from as early as I could ask. Victor’s example was harmless.

But if children consuming pornographic content does lead addictive behaviours, as well as tendencies towards violence to women, then I think we have a duty to at least warn which content is involve so that concerned parents can judge whether their children should play it or not.

54

I honestly don’t think we really have a problem with porn games on IFDB not being easily identifiable as such, and I don’t think that that particular issue is really what Merk was originally concerned about.

55

I’m sure I’ll get shouted down, but what about over the shoulder courtesy?

You’re playing the very literate and mature new release by Sam Reed Short on your laptop, and your elderly mom whom you’re taking care of in her sunset years walks in to pat you on the shoulders before she goes toddling off to bingo. That happens to be right when you type >OPEN DOOR and the screen is suddenly filled unannounced with[rant]boobs tits lick pussy cunt fuck rape ass jism motherfucker shit fuck g-spot[/rant]. She has a heart attack and dies because you had no indication that there was a storyline involving a the exploitation of brothel workers in the game.

It’s different with a book, which can be modestly closed on a finger as opposed to words displayed on a bright, light up 24" display screen.

I guess what I am saying is there is a right to free speech, but there is also the same right to consumer discretion, and someone unaware might want to know FIFTY SHADES OF GREY is not a book on color theory before they throw it in the bag they take to go chaperone the junior high prom.

56

I think you’re probably right re: what Merk was after, and the sexual content issue is a bit of a side track.

I agree: it’s not all that hard to avoid tripping over porn. Because the porn games are labelled in the IFDB. (The exception would be if someone submitted a game of this nature of IFComp, but presumably they’d throw a warning on it.)

My core feeling: we do have a formalized content warning system, then I’d like sexual content to be part of it. Otherwise, it won’t be an effective replacement for just throwing warnings on games in the IFDB… which, of course, is what we do right now. And which (as far as I know) is reasonably effective.

So the worst case scenario here is… duplicated effort. Which isn’t that big a deal, I guess.

I just liked the idea of everything being tidy.

57

So what it seems to come down to is most people feel there should be one rating. Basically a CA (child appropriate) seal of approval that deems that a game has been determined to contain nothing that might be found objectionable or troubling for a person of any age to play.

58

I don’t think that’s the case? See Merk’s recap back on page 4.

It looked to me like we were leaning towards content warnings yes, ratings no, but debating which ones we should include.

59

I don’t see any connection between a rating system for IF and the stifling of free speech. If anybody believes a connection exists, please explain it to me. All I’m advocating is a standardized way for a person to know the type of content to expect. The content itself would remain exactly as it is now, unless anybody believes that the rating system is there to coerce the content into being something other than it would have been otherwise.

A “CA” rating would be fine for my purposes now… but only for a while. I’ll happily let my kids play different kinds of games as they mature, and I would imagine there being different stages of that. Right this moment, I can’t predict when those stages will happen, or what kind of content I think they’ll be ready for. As a parent, I have a degree of responsibility for what they can access while they’re minors. A rating system is a tool that could help in making those decisions easier.

Realistically, even with a rating system, I’ll still be picking and choosing what they play, rather than leaving it up to them. There aren’t any parental controls for blocking particular works of IF, nor am I suggesting that there should be. It’ll be a while before I turn them loose with full internet access and tell them “just use your best judgement.”

But back to what got me thinking on this to begin with, IFDB isn’t the only source for IF. It’s everywhere. 25 Ectocomp games were just released, and a rating system would have been a great way to know right away which ones would be appropriate for Addie and which ones wouldn’t. And maybe part of that is because of my own, which becomes kid-unfriendly a little ways in.

I apologize if it came across as if I was recommending censorship. That’s really not my point. I’m just recommending making it clear what kind of content to expect, and a rating system would seem to me the best and most universally recognized way of doing that.

60

Yeah, my central concern is that what’s desired here seems to be something tidy, formal, consistent, visible, and fair. Which is to say, authoritative. And even if you’re happy with the basic concept of having an authoritative classification - which seems to be far from settled - then you’re kind of obliged to make damn sure it’s actually authoritative, because otherwise both authors and players will have seriously legitimate beef with you.

And practically speaking, I don’t think that that would be within our means as a community. To get things consistent, you would need someone willing to go through many, many games, play them all exhaustively to root out any possible Hidden Nazi Modes, and rate them. Then you’d have to have another couple of people do the same thing again to check their work, because otherwise it’s entirely likely that someone will, e.g., go through and label every game that mentions homosexual characters as Extreme Sexual Content and every game that uses the word ‘jeez’ as Mature Language. And then you’d need an arbitration process for if they disagreed.

I bring this up because I think of something very similar any time someone suggests that we restrict XYZZY eligibility by some content-based criteria. Even if I thought it was valuable for us to closely police What Is Really IF, I absolutely would not want the job of actually processing it all and making those judgements, and I really wouldn’t trust that job to negative crowdsourcing.