Thread: Kinship Themes

Greetings! We’ve noticed a frequently occurring topic with Kinship themes in the LOTRO community, and wanted to take a moment to clarify our overall policy on this issue.


In-Game Policy
As per section 6 of our End User License Agreement (http://lotro.turbine.com/article/312):

Content created by you must not: (a) infringe any copyright, trademark, patent, trade secret, or other proprietary right of any person or entity; (b) be profane, obscene, indecent or violate any law or regulation; (c) defame, abuse, harass, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others; (d) incite discrimination, hate or violence towards one person or a group because of their race, religion, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender, or insult the victims of crimes against humanity by contesting the existence of those crimes…

What does this mean for Kinships created with a theme that fits one of the above categories? Well, first, it does not violate the rules of this agreement to create such a Kinship. However, such a Kinship must understand that they cannot refuse entry into their ranks based solely on their chosen theme, because that would actually be another form of discrimination (i.e., a religiously-themed kinship cannot deny participation by another player purely because that player is not of that religion; the same applies for race, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender).

What about recruitment for such a Kinship in open chat? Players ARE allowed to make such a recruitment offer in chat. For example, “X Kinship invites you to join our Kinship, please send me a tell for more information.” You may not say, “X Kinship invites you to join our Kinship. You must be X, all others need not apply,” where X is a theme that falls into any of the aforementioned categories. Other players should not then engage in discussions on topic X just because a Kinship of that theme made a recruitment invitation in /ooc. Harassment surrounding such an offer will also be handled accordingly. Also, as per section 13 of the EULA, you may not create anti-X Kinships:

You may not form or participate in groups whose ideology is based upon or resembles anti-religious, anti-ethnic, anti-sexual orientation, nationalistic, racist or sexist philosophies.

Forum Policy
Our policy on the official forums mirrors our in-game policy. Players may post recruitment threads for themed Kinships as discussed above, but should refrain from discussions on those themes. As per our Forum Guidelines (http://forums.lotro.com/announcement.php?f=3&a=1):

12. Discussion of religious or political topics is prohibited on the Forums.

17. Users must not violate, or promote the violation of, Turbine’s terms of service, codes of conduct or end user license agreements.

We hope the above clarifications will help our community understand the rules and reasoning behind both in-game GM and forum moderation enforcement decisions on this topic. These policies are not arbitrary, and are put in place to ensure the most fair and enjoyable gaming environment possible for you, our collective community.

Thank you for your cooperation! If you have questions, please post them below.

So 'age' is not on your 'no descrimination' list?

Seems odd.

Originally Posted by Ulrek

So 'age' is not on your 'no descrimination' list?

Seems odd.

The game itself does so with the Teen Rating.

Age discrimination is everywhere, from Senor Citizen Discounts to "Children under 5 eat free!"

Sometimes it's in your favor, sometimes it's not.

Race, of course, only refers to real-life player's race, right? You can legally have all-dwarf Kinships and the like, right?

Nicely explained Ramen, thank you.

In light of this I'd like to offer a word of caution to members and recruiters from Christian-themed kinships ( I also am a member of one such kinship):

- Please be very careful NOT to include being a Christian as a requirement of membership for this would be considered discrimination based-on religious affiliation.

- Please DO be sure to let any prospective members know that they WILL encounter much discussion within the kinship chat and/or amongst the members in support of the shared Christian theme. If this is going to bother them during their in-game playtime, they may want to consider another kinship.

-Please DO be sure to let any prospective members know that profanity, lewd speech, inappropriate behavior and bashing or defaming of the shared Christian theme and its associated sacred values and terms (God, Jesus Christ, prayer, the Bible, the Cross, etc) will NOT be tolerated and will be grounds for dismissal from the kinship.

I think by using these techniques we who enjoy participation in Christian-themed kinships can keep membership open to all and yet have the administrative freedom to be able to keep out folks who only want to join a kinship to start trouble from within.

I know that this is the world we live in today and Turbine is just flowing with the tide, but this is such nonsense. Why in the world should a kinship not be able to restrict its membership based on ANY category they chose? For Eru's sake, we have IN GAME, race-restricted kinship charters! Yet if I wanted to (and of course I do not want to) make a kinship of players based on their shared real-life race, I would be bounced off the server faster than you can say "Don Imus".
At least we know for sure now that Turbine's lawyers aren't any braver than most other spineless politically correct corporate lackeys anywhere else.

Originally Posted by Ramen

...they cannot refuse entry into their ranks based solely on their chosen theme...

For practical purposes (based on Ramen's own language here), if you want to set up a restrictive kinship, feel free to deny membership to someone on that basis, just make sure to tell them that the real reason is because you don't like the color leggings they wear. At least that gives you a "legal" excuse.

Seems clearer now. I still have one grey spot.

Can I have a "French Kinship" and asking that only french people may join it?

I'm not sure if it falls in nationality, ethnicity discrimination or it's just considered a communication issue.

Thanks

Might want to say "french speaking only kinship rather than just "french only." The latter refers to the nationality thing they are speaking of while the first is just a language barrier thing that is probably understandable... Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Originally Posted by Sevok

Race, of course, only refers to real-life player's race, right? You can legally have all-dwarf Kinships and the like, right?

Yes, we are ok with "Hobbit-only" kinships, for example, because ANYONE can create a Hobbit. You are not excluding any player.

Originally Posted by madscientist254

Might want to say "french speaking only kinship rather than just "french only." The latter refers to the nationality thing they are speaking of while the first is just a language barrier thing that is probably understandable... Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Technically, a player who does not speak French can demand entry into a French-speaking kinship, but its entirely possible that their request would not be understood.

As with any such forcing of rights, there is typically an alterior motive (griefing) that will very quickly provide all the grounds necessary to deny entry or remove someone from your kinship. The only stipulation here is that you cannot, as per the EULA that everyone agreed to upon subscribing to LOTRO, deny entry to your group based solely on race, religion, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender.

Originally Posted by gildhur

I know that this is the world we live in today and Turbine is just flowing with the tide, but this is such nonsense.

You are entitled to your opinion on that of course. All we are doing here is making clear the terms of the EULA that all players have agreed to abide by.

Rules are rules.

of course using the hobbit only example. anyone could make a female char to get into a female only kinship. or make a dark skinned char to get into a kin themed on dark skinned dwarves. Its not discriminating against the real persons race/gender. But id think it would still be considered a "bad thing" to do because it could be easilly misunderstood.

Ok, what if you wanted to start a kinship that didn't allow illegal aliens? Would that fall under the nationality restriction, since you're only allowing people of your nation in?

If that's so, what if you expanded it so that people from other countries are allowed in, but only if they are living in the country with which they are considered a citizen? Does that still fall under the nationality restriction?

Ok, so if the above is true, what if we made contact with an alien race tomorrow, could we keep them out, if the alien race wasn't humanoid? Can we restrict based on species? I mean they could be jerks, you know, and not fun to play with.

/sarcasm off

Just messing around, trying to poke holes in the EULA, and the protests today happened to be the last article I read before coming here.

Originally Posted by Bruiserk

Ok, what if you wanted to start a kinship that didn't allow illegal aliens? Would that fall under the nationality restriction, since you're only allowing people of your nation in?

I know you're not serious, but "illegal" is not a nation.

Well thanks for finally making the rules clear.

I may not agree with them, but there's nothing I can do about it, I respect you guys for your choices and I'll flow with it.

One question: (I'll try and make this a light one, i.e. replace bio with something religious or profane) Lets say one of our rules is we can't use the /bio emote because it's inappropriate. Since we need open membership a member joins. "Bioman" attends the next event and during it he goes Bio multiple times. We remove him from our clan and he calls it fowl because we can't discriminate because of what he did.

I'm on the advisary council of a kinship and I want to make sure we don't get introuble for what we do.

^just for the record, I love that Emote

Originally Posted by Eihen

One question: (I'll try and make this a light one, i.e. replace bio with something religious or profane) Lets say one of our rules is we can't use the /bio emote because it's inappropriate. Since we need open membership a member joins. "Bioman" attends the next event and during it he goes Bio multiple times. We remove him from our clan and he calls it fowl because we can't discriminate because of what he did.

One would suppose that if you were clear in your charter that the /bio emote was not allowed in your membership, and Bioman persisted in that behavior even after being warned, then he has no valid basis for his complaint. After all, his emote behavior is completely under his control; you're not kicking him out because the PLAYER has a Y chromosome, or resides south of the equator, or anything that he doesn't have complete and immediate control over.

I think the terms are there to keep people from discriminating based on the player. Frankly, anything having to do with the behavior of the player is perfectly fair game. You're allowed to kick annoying people out of your kinship, or people who node-steal, or constantly dominate kinship chat with pointless chatter and won't shut up. Your example is a purely social discrimination that I believe is within the rules.

And by the way, I love that emote too!

Originally Posted by Shukar

One would suppose that if you were clear in your charter that the /bio emote was not allowed in your membership, and Bioman persisted in that behavior even after being warned, then he has no valid basis for his complaint. After all, his emote behavior is completely under his control; you're not kicking him out because the PLAYER has a Y chromosome, or resides south of the equator, or anything that he doesn't have complete and immediate control over.

I think the terms are there to keep people from discriminating based on the player. Frankly, anything having to do with the behavior of the player is perfectly fair game. You're allowed to kick annoying people out of your kinship, or people who node-steal, or constantly dominate kinship chat with pointless chatter and won't shut up. Your example is a purely social discrimination that I believe is within the rules.

And by the way, I love that emote too!

Wait....wouldn't that be discriminating against annoying people? They may not be able to control their irritating behavior?

/sarcasm off (again)

What I don't get is all the christian only kinships thinly-veiled as all welcoming.

If I was in a christian only kinship and started talking about facts and reason I would be removed. They even post here on how to get around the EULA so they can have their own little divisive kinships.

/shrug

If I started an Atheist only kinship would that be anti-religious?

kinship missions statement: We will be discussing facts and hypothesis based on evidence and debunking fairy tales in the real world every day. And doing pie runs.

IMHO, your mission as described is anti-religious since 'debunking fairy tales' will likely be /reported as a thinly veiled reference to debunking religion and advocating atheism. See, it's not atheism as the nexus of the kinship that's the problem, it's the proseltyzing, advocating, or other hostile-seeming activities that are the problem.

And it couldn't be atheist only as that would be discriminatory.

If you said something like 'Come join like-minded fellow atheists for fun, pies and provocative discussions' that would probably pass.

I was referred here by Patience. I'd send her a PM asking directly, but since she put me on her ignore list, and I can't send her PM's...

Is making an atheist kinship within the rules, and what would be the limits to this? Would, for example, the title "Aethists of Gondor" be inappropriate?

I tried to post this on a separate thread (didn't know this one existed..), but I just got linked here, instead of the question actually being answered. And the OP is far too generalized.

This would likely depend on the exact wording of the kinship title, the guild's mission statement, recruiting tactics, etc. My reading of the TOS says "yes, you can make an atheist kinship," but know going in that you have to tread a very fine line, that you'll have to let in non-atheists, you can't advocate atheism in open channels and you're going to be a /report magnet for even the smallest slip up.

Most of the Christian kinships have had a dev post in their thread offering some clarification of expectations, so if you really want to have an atheist kinship, make a thread and see what happens. If you're over the line, you'll hear about it.

This being said, from your original post it sounds like you want to do this just for the sake of tit-for-tat controversy. Am I misreading you?

Originally Posted by Saesa

This would likely depend on the exact wording of the kinship title, the guild's mission statement, recruiting tactics, etc. My reading of the TOS says "yes, you can make an atheist kinship," but know going in that you have to tread a very fine line, that you'll have to let in non-atheists, you can't advocate atheism in open channels and you're going to be a /report magnet for even the smallest slip up.

Most of the Christian kinships have had a dev post in their thread offering some clarification of expectations, so if you really want to have an atheist kinship, make a thread and see what happens. If you're over the line, you'll hear about it.

This being said, from your original post it sounds like you want to do this just for the sake of tit-for-tat controversy. Am I misreading you?

Why I'd want to do it isn't the point, or the issue. You're the one assuming things. *shrug*

Actually, the 'why' is rather relevant as the TOS bit about 'anti-religion' has to do in part with intentions.

<shrug>

Since you're not interested in freindly assessments of your question, I'll toddle on.

Cheers,

Saesa

What about the guild whor efuse entry to anyone who does not want to sign up for the guild's forums or who will not use ventrilo? Seriously I was booted from a guild because I did not want to install some chat program when there is already one in the game. Should I hire a lawyer? (heh kiddin on last part)

The kinship charter items in game create kinships that have different rank names based on the theme of Mixed, Man, Elf, Dwarf, and Hobbit. Any race can still join any kinship, as far as the coding of that item goes. But yes, chief point there is that the race of one's character never need rely on the race of that character's controller.

Extraterrestrials are people, too.

Gareth, couple points: firstly, they're completely in their rights. Secondly, while I'm personally not so fanatic about Ventrilo/TeamSpeak/etc., I very much understand their concerns. For one, the in-game voice chat pales greatly by comparison, distorting audio much more than a paid-for voice chat server. Further, I've seen a lot of people that rely on voice chat so much that they seem incapable of communicating with effort greater than pushing a single button and are totally oblivious to any of the words in their chat box. I think a better question for you would be why you would even want to be in such a kinship when you obviously have a very different viewpoint on the issue.

And thank you, Ramen. It's good to see a proper place to discuss this instead of all the threads whining about the people whining about the kinships that whine about people's ... ah, hell, I can't even keep it straight any more.

Saesa,

I was being sarcastic with the mission statement in reference to many christian mission statements I've read....lowest form of wit but it's still wit.

Hey! thanks for the clarity!

Quidpro

Originally Posted by Quidpro

Saesa,

I was being sarcastic with the mission statement in reference to many christian mission statements I've read....lowest form of wit but it's still wit.

Hey! thanks for the clarity!

Quidpro

Ahh, my apologies. I thought it was a Daniel Dennett/Richard Dawkins reference.



BTW, nice handle. In another game, I had an entire family of "Quos", Miranda, Status and Quidpro.

Originally Posted by Saesa

Ahh, my apologies. I thought it was a Daniel Dennett/Richard Dawkins reference.



BTW, nice handle. In another game, I had an entire family of "Quos", Miranda, Status and Quidpro.

I would've quoted Dawkins but someone, I'm sure, would've said that's anti-religous...unsure why (sarcasm is easier when spoken heh).

Family of "Quo's" very nice indeed!

Quidpro

I suppose I could make "Quidpro Quo of the Quickpost Kinship of Qualophobes!" mmmm

Quid - tell you what. You post up some Dawkins and I'll sit here with a stopwatch to time the /report, 'kay?

(kidding, totally and completely kidding!)

Originally Posted by Tsion

-Please DO be sure to let any prospective members know that profanity, lewd speech, inappropriate behavior and bashing or defaming of the shared Christian theme and its associated sacred values and terms (God, Jesus Christ, prayer, the Bible, the Cross, etc) will NOT be tolerated and will be grounds for dismissal from the kinship.

I'm not sure you can get away with this actually, in part it depends on whether expression of dissent gets counted as defaming. You couldn't boot someone for say "I believe in Allah, not Christ", for example, any more than you could boot them for saying they were of a particular race. Even if they say it loudly and often, dismissing them for it would be religious discrimination and prohibited by the EULA. I doubt you could even get away with booting them for trashing the bible pretty severely, as long as the weren't using vulgarity or making fun of Christians. You can't dismiss them for the mere expression of beliefs regarding religious topics.

Bottom line is that if members are allowed to "bash and defame" other religions, agnosticism, or atheism, then members cannot be dismissed for "bashing and defaming" the "Christian theme and its associated sacred values and terms."

In short, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

My impression is that kinships and fellowships are completely voluntary. You can kick anyone you want for any reason.

I believe the "rule," though, is just that you can't advertise a kinship that only accepts people that are <whatever> or accepts everyone except those that are <whatever>, where <whatever> refers to the things already listed out too many times: race, religion, ethnicity, whatever.

Kind of a non issue still, though. If someone actually felt they were kicked on unjust grounds, why would they want to be in such a group in the first place?

Originally Posted by Saesa

Quid - tell you what. You post up some Dawkins and I'll sit here with a stopwatch to time the /report, 'kay?

(kidding, totally and completely kidding!)

Hilarious, I was considering starting a "Reason and critical thinking" Kinship called "Order of the Lucid Eye" or just "Lucidai" on Brandywine, but wasn't sure if I would get any interest... with people defending atheism here and mentioning Dawkins, maybe... heh.

kinda wacky to see what some guardhouse lawyers think up lol
ps dawkins is not anti-religion (jk)
pps is it against the rules for me to joke around with people regarding short fat dwarves (jk again)

This is all good and fine. But, let's say that kinship x has a theme and said theme has written in it's laws that they are to not have anything to do with anyone not belonging to that theme. And also written in that theme's laws they are told that it's okay to not only discriminate against but, also to kill any who do not follow their theme. What if said theme has written in their laws that their "leader" is known for and responcible for destroying entire nations of people for not following said theme? Would that kinship still be allowed to exist?

I say that any and all kinships theme's must be within Tolkein lore or there will be trouble.

Your first paragraph describes stuff that likely would not be accepted and would be against the rules. Some labels are more clear references than others to this. Those labels that would clearly connote what you describe are likely censored on this board.

The second paragraph does not at all follow the first. That's a completely separate and non-related argument.

I'd love to see more RP enforcement on both player names and kinship themes, but there are vicious grey areas all around and it's hard to draw the line.

Originally Posted by Saesa

Ahh, my apologies. I thought it was a Daniel Dennett/Richard Dawkins reference.

Richard Dawkins, wasn't he the host of the Family Feud?

Hi, Baruk Kazahd (Strictly a PVE kinship) is recruiting mature and active members right now... we have a ventrilo server up and running at al times... friendly group of ppl to play with and a great website where all the updates of the game and the kinship is posted... the leaders of this kinship have been guild leaders of some of the top guilds on world of warcraft so u should know that ur in good hands... if u would like to apply to play in this kinship please go ingame on NIMRODEL server and contact one of the leads.

Kinship Lord: Trinista
MightyMidget
Zerina

Second in command: Dragonhert

Officers: CactusJack
Durgrin
Thoromur
Thunderhammer
Thurathelion

the kinship website URL is www.barukkazahd.com
Please register on the forums (mandatory)

Originally Posted by Im_Mereniel

Richard Dawkins, wasn't he the host of the Family Feud?

Richard DAWSON (sp???) hosted the Family Feud...hehe...

*****bump*****

I have agreed to the EULA and will abide by it. However I can't let this pass without comment.

I realize that Turbine is just trying to keep the peace with these rules but it is still absurd. If people want to have a kinship of one legged, black, Jewish people who follow Hinduism and only invite such people to the kinship, what does it matter? Is it somehow holier to make the criteria just "well we just don't like you" and deny membership based upon that?

People of all walks of life feel more comfortable with others who are similar, whether or not this is a cultural, religious, or other similarity. That is why they congregate together. If someone wants to have a Jewish kinship and only invite orthodox Jews for example, how does this hurt anyone? Inside of their kinship they then know that they have this in common and don't have to feel the need to tiptoe around others who are not Jewish so as not to offend or even feel the need to explain Hebrew catch phases to the newbie. (Are there Hebrew catch phrases? Still you get the point.)

It seems to me that the rules governing free speech are taken to an extreme in this case. I think most people understand why profanity is filtered by default, and that Turbine is not going to let a kinship called, "Nazi White Power Racists" exist on their servers. This offends the majority of people in the world. Majority rules. But that different than saying you can't deny membership based upon a kinship theme. You know what? An atheist who is allowed to join a Christian themed kinship and becomes offended, joined that kinship specifically to get offended and cause trouble. If I don't speak German or live in Germany, I know that a German kinship is not going to work out for me. Why should they be forced to allow me in if they know that the point of the kinship would be lost on an English speaking person from the USA? Why should their right to be selective about their membership be curtailed simply for some sophomoric idealism that states I should be MADE to fit in, despite the theme.

Yes this is a small issue and no I won't have any problems following the guidelines laid out by Turbine. But it should be noted that Turbine's efforts to go to such lengths to not offend anyone has failed. I am offended. Online gaming is my way of letting off steam after a hard day in a politically correct corporate environment. I don't like the fact that I have to worry about who might be offended in a virtual world.