(no subject)
Jun. 1st, 2006 03:32 amLearning in Milliways Bar
As noted above, joining the Milliways community is a formal process of ‘apping’ a pup and then introducing her into the bar. Playing the game can be somewhat "intimidating" for a new mun because the existing community is large and diverse, and interactions among experienced muns are often filled with short-hand references to the game's rich and complex shared repertoire. The FAQ offers some helpful hints for new muns, including a recommendation that they add as much content as they can to their pup’s personal LiveJournal so other muns can get a sense of what this new pup will be like. But the moderators also warn new muns that:
Don't be too worried if your first few posts don't garner a large number of
responses. Many players in Milliways are used to interacting with a core group of
characters, and we're all of us a bit shy, sometimes, even those of us who've been
here since the beginning. Don't delete your entrance post if it doesn't get any
responses; it still lets other people know your character is in the bar.
They further recommend that a new mun have his pup approach others in the bar (by making a post on the other pups' threads). Most experienced muns will welcome the approach of a new mun, and the threads that result from their interactions will, ideally, show the new mun, by example, how the game works as well as begin the process of integrating the new pup (and her mun) into the Milliways community. These interactions between new and experienced muns are a clear example of Wenger’s "legitimate peripheral participation," teaching beginners the basics of proper threading through practice. Newcomers who brave the chat room may learn the game more quickly because the chat allows a swift exchange of role-playing tips and suggestions.[1] It should be said, however, that peripheral participation in Milliways is no guarantee that a new mun will become an accomplished member. Role-playing is an art which every mun struggles with at one time or another, but a new mun who finds it especially frustrating may decide not to stay with the game.
Pups and muns do come and go in Milliways (every bar has its discontinuities), and some muns may find that a given pup has effectively ‘told his story’ and should be retired. In some cases, they may put their pup up for ‘adoption,’ in the hope that another mun might better express the pup’s voice and give him a better chance in the bar. There is a LiveJournal called “Millidoption” devoted to making these quasi-discontinuities as smooth as possible. [2]
Interestingly, the politics of participation and reification are not necessarily dependent on the length of time one has belonged to the bar. To be sure, those who have been a consistent presence for the past two years tend to have greater influence in the community, but ‘younger’ muns have also established a significant presence thanks to their regular appearances, and in particular, their talent and generosity as role-players. The structure of the game does not inherently encourage a mun to acquire as many contacts as possible—as the moderators note, many muns stay within smaller, established relationships—but there are informal rewards for becoming a widely known member of the Milliways community. In particular, the mun of a well-known and respected pup will be contacted more often by other muns, asking if the mun would be willing to include his popular pup in a new threads and plots. [3]
The similarities between Milliways Bar and the classic pub described in Ray Oldenburg’s The Great Good Place are obvious. Milliways is a classic ‘third place,’ where conversation is the most frequent activity, business is not a welcome option, and newcomers must sometimes bide their time before they are welcomed among the ranks of the regulars.[4] If the Bar at the End of the Universe is sometimes cliquish, it is also a community that welcomes most and whose denizens have learned to tolerate the wildest eccentricities. Oldenburg, one suspects, might well approve.
Behavior in Milliways: Some Initial Comments
Behavior in the community of Milliways Bar is not strictly regulated, either for muns or for their pups. While there are certain mechanisms available to the moderators and muns for regulating behavior, they are not immediately apparent when one plays the game. Muns typically regulate their own behavior with other muns, and have great autonomy in determining the actions of their pups and even the consequences of those actions. This result seems intended by the moderators, who are, after all, overseeing an entertainment, but the policies and informal practices associated with regulating behavior present two challenges:
First, a thorough discussion of these mechanisms is complicated by the fact that this study is being conducted according to a policy of full-disclosure to the Milliways community. Therefore, in the interest of not causing undue harm to any mun or moderator, this paper will err on the side of brevity in addressing certain elements, particularly those involving conflict resolution.
Second, due to the literary nature of the game, there are no 'levels' or other easily quantifiable elements by which to compare pups or mun participation. Nor does Milliways have a system for determining reputations or social presence, much less clearly defined 'goals.' Yet, although Milliways is short on numbers, one can still discuss reputation and presence in terms of mun interaction, and this paper tries to address how they manifest in the game and the community.
Joining the Community and the Role of Chat
Methods of regulating behavior must first ensure that muns are given some understanding of what is or is not expected. The Milliways community accomplishes this using several of the concepts described in Derek Powazek's book, Design for Community. While in general, "anyone can join," a mun must first go through an approval process (described in part one), which signals to new muns that the community expects a higher level of commitment than would be suggested by a more streamlined and impersonal gateway. The process is also an opportunity for the moderators to make their presence known, even before applicants have joined the community. The moderators can confirm muns' basic contact information (email), and direct them to the rules pages of the site.[5]
Once a mun is through the approval process, the expectations of the community are further reinforced by elements of the game which promote 'meta-interactions' among muns, such as the "Back Room," the chat room, and instant messaging. Many of the postings in the Back Room are announcements by muns that they have been or will be called away from the game (for hours, days, or even weeks) by that most dreaded of obligations, "Real Life." These public apologies can help new muns understand what standards of courtesy prevail in the community.[6] The chat room offers an even more active environment which can quickly give muns a sense of acceptable behavior both in chat and on the LiveJournal pages. Typically both virtual spaces "police themselves." [7]
It should be said, however, that there are differences of opinion in the Milliways community regarding "crackchat" (the largest Milliways-related chat room) and its importance in the game. In the survey, 36 of 83 respondents agreed, and 14 strongly agreed, that A chat room was important for role-playing in Milliways. However, when presented with the statement, "I prefer smaller chat rooms, rather than crackchat, when I RP in Milliways," 29 of the respondents agreed and 21 strongly agreed. [8] There are several possible reasons for this. Some muns, unfortunately, have had bad experiences in chat (like any community, Milliways has its share of personality conflicts). However, to some degree smaller chat rooms may only be a natural reaction to the growth of the community, which by the end of 2005 had become large enough to feel the effects of fragmentation.
And it should be said that there is no rule to suggest that chat is required for active participation in Milliways. Madb, a mun who has been part of the game since "Before Chat," prefers to contact other muns by instant messaging or by emailing them.[9] She adds, "Generally, however, I have RP'ed with someone for a while before I feel the need to contact them for anything plotty." [10] Rather than chat, "If I see someone interesting I toss a character at them [in LiveJournal]. If they feel like RP'ing with my character all is good, if not I just shrug and move on. It seems more organic (in my mind) than going into a room and asking people to play with me." Madb's comments suggest that, just as Milliways allows for many kinds of stories, the game is flexible enough to allow different styles of participation. [11]
Conflict
Despite this flexibility, however, conflict remains an issue for Milliways. Muns in the game are not entirely anonymous, and the expectation of continued participation does provide an incentive for people to get along.[12] But text-based online chat communication, deprived of important information such as body language, facial expression, and vocal inflection, cannot avoid occasional misunderstandings which may turn into arguments. Moreover, a community devoted to self-expression should be expected to attract members with strong opinions and feelings.[13] Fortunately, most such disagreements in Milliways appear to be accidental and unintended, and the community seems largely free from the sort of conscious, malicious behavior noted by Anna DuVal Smith in her study of MicroMUSE.[14] Nonetheless, there have been disagreements among muns, and while the moderators have expressed their willingness to act as mediators, some muns have found other means for expressing their discontent.[15]
The most visible forum for conflict are LiveJournal pages devoted to "rants" or "wanks" by disgruntled muns. One of the most well-known (read: 'infamous') of these pages is "Bad Role Players Suck" [16] "BRPS" receives complaints from players in many LiveJournal role-playing communities, including Milliways, though references to specific characters or players are usually (if not always) disguised. Such a site does provide a kind of release for disagreements in the community, but BRPS is a very public forum, accessible by anyone who knows its address. So while it may act as a pressure valve in some cases, it also can become a source for additional conflict. As an alternative, some Milliways muns have created 'wank communities' which are 'friends-locked,' accessible only by those whom the moderator adds to that LiveJournal's "Friends List." [17] On the one hand such a community does keep complaints restricted to a smaller and more private group of readers, and this may prevent a conflict from escalating. On the other hand, such a community cannot be considered a resource for the entire community because it is not available to every member, and a given mun may not have access to any of them unless she is admitted by one of their moderators. If the 'wank communities' do benefit Milliways, their effect across the community is probably uneven at best.
For muns who remain 'in the system,' however, the moderators have recently established "an organized system of consequences for rule-breakage." First infractions receive a warning, and second infractions a one-week suspension from the game. Each infraction after that results in a doubling of the suspension period. "Repeated disruption and rules-breakage" may result in a mun and his pups being banned from the community. The moderators note that the increasing size of the bar demanded a more formal policy, and that having it will allow them to be more consistent in enforcing the rules than would be possible were they handled on a "case-by-case basis." Of course, as one moderator noted, "any increase in procedure means an increase in work." [18]
Milliways as a Public Good, and the Issue of Social Loafing
A public good is "a resource from which all may benefit, regardless of whether they have helped create the good (e.g., public television or a community improvement project)." A public good may prompt some members of the community to become "free riders" who "enjoy a public good without contributing to its production." The problem this presents is that if everyone chooses to be a free rider, the resource will never be created.[19] The collective "public good" of Milliways are the stories created by the muns and the threads by which those stories are told.
While Milliways must contend with a certain degree of conflict, social loafing seems less of an issue. A mun could opt not to participate, but that would mean the complete absence of her pups from life in the bar. There are reasons why a given mun might not participate for a time (for example, loss of internet access or a "Real Life" obligation), but social loafing is unlikely given the effort a mun must make to apply for the community, and the tendency of Milliways to attract people who wish to participate in the game.[20]
One could even argue that non-participation is costly. From time-to-time, the moderators go through the "cast list" and "purge" it of pups who have not been played regularly.[21] Failure to maintain a presence in the bar might also mean losing an opportunity to participate in ongoing storylines that might be relevant to that mun's pups. Moreover, as the Milliways FAQ notes, most muns are accustomed to interacting with a particular group of other muns, and becoming a member of such an informal circle requires regular participation over time.[22]
[1]Wenger, Communities, 99-102; Milliways Bar LiveJournal, FAQ, http://community.livejournal.com/milliways_bar/data/customview?styleid=626750
[2]Milliways Bar LiveJournal, Millidoption, http://community.livejournal.com/millidoption/ There is a related LiveJournal called Milli_wanted, where muns may post a request that someone app a pup, usually one from the same canon as a pup run by the mun who is posting the request: http://community.livejournal.com/milli_wanted/ In the survey, 19 of 52 respondents said they had retired at least one pup because "her story was told," and 33 said they "had the pup's voice" or run out of stories for her. (The question allowed more than one answer.) For survey results, see: http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=199959937566
[3]Wenger, Communities, 91-93; Milliways Bar LiveJournal, FAQ, http://community.livejournal.com/milliways_bar/data/customview?styleid=626750
[4]Ray Oldenburg, The Great Good Place (New York: Marlowe & Company, 1989), 26-29, 34-36, 38-41.
[5]Derek M. Powazek, Design for Community: The Art of Connecting Real People in Virtual Places (Indianapolis: New Riders, 2002), 90-99, 119; Milliways Bar LiveJournal, Information page, retrieved on Feb. 12, 2006, from http://community.livejournal.com/milliways_bar/profile; Milliways Bar Livejournal, FAQ, retrieved on February 9, 2006, from http://community.livejournal.com/milliways_bar/data/customview?styleid=626750
[6]Milliways Bar LiveJournal, “Ways Back Room,” retrieved on February 9, 2006, from http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/ No specific posting need be offered because even a quick pass through the page will turn up many examples.
[7]Powazek, Design, 120-121.
[8]For survey results, see: http://www.surveymonkey.com/Report.asp?U=199959937566
[9]In their interview, the moderators noted that several months passed before chat became a part of the game. Their best guess was December 2004 or January 2005, the point at which the community had grown just large enough to require more "structure" when its members tried to plan elaborate plots that involved most of their pups.
[10]"Plotty" meaning a discussion with another mun about an idea for a plot involving their pups.
[11]See http://the-croupier.livejournal.com/3304.html?thread=6888#t6888 for this discussion. Madb has organized several successful plots which have gone on to become points of reference for the community, even among muns who did not participate in them.
[12]Powazek, Design, 119-120.
[13]Anna DuVal Smith, "Problems of conflict management in virtual communities," in Communities in Cyberspace, eds. Marc A. Smith and Peter Kollack (New York: Routledge, 1999), 136. See http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1314559.html from August 4, 2005, and http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1588683.html from October 15, 2005, both retrieved on March 10, 2006, for examples of posts which speak to the standards of behavior expected from members, as well as an acknowledgement of the challenges facing "a community of creative, dynamic people."
[14]Smith, "Problems," 141-142. One exception to this streak of good fortune was a person who tried to present himself in the chat room as one of the muns in the game. The moderators were able to confirm this person was an imposter because they had no record of the person's name or his adoption of the pup he claimed belonged to him. The following announcement about this incident was posted in the Back Room on October 20, 2005, and retrieved on March 10, 2006: http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1588683.html
[15]See http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1510003.html from September 26, 2006, http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1804901.html from January 2, 2006, and http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1851457.html from January 17, 2006, all retrieved on March 10, 2006, for recent efforts by the moderators to make themselves available to the community. Note the emphasis they repeatedly place on ensuring the privacy of those who make a complaint, and their desire to keep the process of disciplinary actions private as well, "because we all make mistakes, and folks deserve the benefit of the doubt."
[16]BRPS can be found at the following URL: http://community.livejournal.com/bad_rpers_suck/
[17]There were at least two LiveJournals currently operating as 'wank communities' for Milliways Bar when the first draft of this paper was written in March. One of them has since closed down, apparently because the moderator decided the community was doing more harm than its intended good. Because they are technically private, I have decided against citing their URLs here. For the same reason, it is hard to know how rules are established in these communities or what criteria their moderators use to decide who belongs in them and who does not.
[18]Comments from the moderator interview conducted on April 8, 2006. For the announcement of the new policy, instituted on November 1, 2005, and announced in the Back Room, see: http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1625076.html
[19]Peter Kollock and Marc Smith, "Managing the Virtual Commons: Cooperation and Conflict in Computer Communities," 109-128, in Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives, edited by Susan Herring (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1996).
[20]It is true that by posting their stories in a public LiveJournal, the Milliways muns are making them available to any lurker who wishes to read them. I am not, however, aware of any data available that would suggest how many lurkers Milliways might have, and given the degree of activity in the community, there does not seem to be an immediate problem of incentives encouraging lurking over participation.
[21]See http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1535028.html from October 4, 2006, and http://community.livejournal.com/ways_back_room/1579559.html from October 17, 2005, both retrieved on March 10, 2006, for instructions given to muns during the purge. Muns could ask the moderators not to purge a pup, but the mun was asked to take the initiative. The muns have recently announced another purge for summer 2006, as will be seen below. For the 'cast list,' now with 449 'fandoms,' see http://www.silveraspen.net/milliways/members.php
[22]See the portion of the FAQ concerning the question "If I am new, how do I get started in a thread?" retrieved February 10, 2006, at http://community.livejournal.com/milliways_bar/data/customview?styleid=626750
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}