[Dev1ce19]

Hello all. I had a very disturbing and disgusting experience at one of the casual games tabke. The opp started sending me lewd messages privately and after reporting him to BBO I left the table.
BBO comes back to me with their standard response that they will overlook it as his first reported mistake.

Is that all right? Are women now supposed to hide their names from their profile or risk getting assaulted ( in a way)

Is BBO so beaurocratic and unresponsive to such a serious issue?
Why is BBO taking this issue at par with rude behavior by some players?

Disgusting

[hrothgar]

I'm incredibly sorry that this happened to you.

I think that this deserved something other than a form letter (and I hope that something is provided)

You ask whether or not women should have to hide their sex in their accounts.

They absolutely should not have to, but this is an excellent example why many choose to do so.
This is a pervasive problem on the internet and in online gaming in particular.

[FelicityR]

I totally agree it is wrong on every level for any player, whatever their gender or nationality to receive rude and/or disgusting unsolicited mail from other players. Women especially as it can be very upsetting as appears to be the case here.

For BBO to completely overlook the matter as it is 'a first offence' is absurd. Not everyone who has been subject to lewd comments reports it. I personally think that BBO needs to reappraise their nonchalance towards this type of behaviour. Their are levels of rudeness/lewdness, and anything bordering on sexual or political (e.g. anti-semitism) should be dealt with firmly from the outset, immediately blocking that person's IP address.

They may come back on another device, phone or computer, and start again, but in time they will have no means of accessing BBO except by buying new equipment. At least many Police forces around the world now take this type of computer abuse seriously and will deal with a formal complaint. BBO need to do likewise. It's not as though they have much investigating to do.

[Dev1ce19]

Thank you for your responses. BBO again came back to me saying that if you want to avoid this kind of experience pls mark the other person as ignore.
It basically resonates with the thinking that you sort yourself out and the perpetrator will go free. Lol

[johnu]

BBO has better things to do. Like not fixing GIB, or making more money.

Honestly, if this is a random account, only plays in free games so no credit history, no ID, then the best BBO can do is kill the account and then the miscreant can just create another random account.

If this is the ID of somebody who is a member of a national bridge association and who has a member number and/or real name, BBO could certainly forward their real name to the national organization for potential discipline. And then BBO could kill the account and not let that player buy any BBO dollars or create a new account and register that account with the national organization.

[pilowsky]

Which is the reason why it is a good idea to not permit anonymity on BBO.
If people were required to use their real names so that they could be tracked then this kind of behaviour would be much easier to police.


I note that many of the people that write here and play on BBO using pseudonyms are happy to write under their real names on Bridgewinners.
They also seem to yearn for platforms where video images of players are required (Realbridge).


I don't wear a disguise when I do anything else.
Allowing avatars and nicknames promotes racism, misogyny and rudeness.
There's enough of it in real life without making it easier online.

[diana_eva]

As a woman on the internet I completely resonate with the OP that such messages are disturbing.

However assuming that BBO does nothing and the perpetrator goes free is wrong, sorry.

The canned answer Abuse sends out is something generic like "we'll take measures ranging from a warning for the first offense to permanent banning" but that does not mean:

- this offense is considered light enough for a warning, even if it were first offense
- this was the first offense for the player who has been reported


We'll review the answers Abuse sends out and improve them.

[barmar]

pilowsky, on 2021-August-18, 21:57, said:

Which is the reason why it is a good idea to not permit anonymity on BBO.

[mycroft]

• This is awful. You don't deserve this.
  
• GIFT (© Penny Arcade, 100% accurate and totally NSFW) applies. Note that anonymity isn't part of the theory.
  
• It applies on ****book and elsewhere, where anonymity is "disallowed". Repeatedly and demonstrably a nightmare for women, muslims, ... Some people are so sure in themselves that rules apply to other people that it doesn't matter if they put their name to the abuse. Some are so sure in themselves that they are *right* to do this that there is nothing to fear about tying abuse to their full name.
  
• Abuse in bridge is a perennial issue. A game that appeals to very smart people, where the goal is to outwit very smart people. One of the issues with "very smart people" is that there is a compulsion to show that they are very smart, and that shows up at the bridge table as abuse. And it's easy when "showing your superiority" to drop into "typical" behaviour.
  
• Remember that anonymity works both ways. My "first" experience with this was the person who had an online stalker who couldn't have her real name in *our* database because it couldn't be presented in our web site. Requiring trueNames is prohibiting those people (and all the rest from my previous walks through this game) from playing bridge at all. I'm sure they're more than we'd gain by people not being ****holes as "James Bragan" rather than "Just Play bridge".
  
• Thank you Diana Eva, for explaining. I "knew" that was the case (that abuse@ would not tell the complainant what happened, just what could happen), but especially in this case, I didn't want to say something incorrect.

[hrothgar]

pilowsky, on 2021-August-18, 21:57, said:

Which is the reason why it is a good idea to not permit anonymity on BBO.
If people were required to use their real names so that they could be tracked then this kind of behaviour would be much easier to police.


I note that many of the people that write here and play on BBO using pseudonyms are happy to write under their real names on Bridgewinners.
They also seem to yearn for platforms where video images of players are required (Realbridge).


I don't wear a disguise when I do anything else.
Allowing avatars and nicknames promotes racism, misogyny and rudeness.
There's enough of it in real life without making it easier online.

Comment 1: Just because someone tells you that there name is "John Smith" doesn't mean anything. Self identification is trivial to evade. More complex schemes that offer better performance add significant expense.

Comment 2: Case in point: It is trivial to create a new ID on BridgeWinner's using whatever name you.

Comment 3: "I don't wear a disguise when I do anything else"

Good for you, but not the choice that you get to make for other people.