3 ms·

Some key context, provided if you read the article, is that this exists to outline the difference between LARPing and Violent Extremism, especially as some viol

Some key context, provided if you read the article, is that this exists to outline the difference between LARPing and Violent Extremism, especially as some violent extremists have claimed that their plans of violence were only "LARPing" and not bona-fide terrorism. The exact differences they point out, such as "spectators being welcome" vs "secrecy is paramount" are clear, universal, well thought out, and interesting to read about and consider.

slavboj 3y ago
It's not like there isn't a robust history of law enforcement "spectators" trying to railroad participants based on absolutely nothing, including in literal role playing scenarios. Privacy rights exist for a reason. http://www.sjgames.com/SS/ http://www.sjgames.com/SS/
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
pseudalopex 3y ago
The article had many good points. But many claims about LARP were not universal or not clear. Some performances are private. Some LARP is solo. The article acknowledged small groups but the table did not. People in many hobbies discuss law enforcement concerns, guidance to each other if confronted by an officer, and criminal cases where the hobby is mentioned. Role players have confirmation bias like other people. Some theatrical presentations have real antagonists.
- Y-bar 3y ago
  I did not read the article as being that black and white, rather as a set of rules of thumb. Such as if enough boxes are ticked the investigator should maybe consider that it is not a real LARPer, but rather someone who tries to hide behind a veil of LARPing.
  - pseudalopex 3y ago
    The comment I replied to called the differences universal. The article said LARP is always group-based. Possibly the authors intended the other claims to be rules of thumb. Certainly their intended audience included people who tend to think in black and white. And several claims I contradicted were faulty rules of thumb.

slavboj 3y ago

It's not like there isn't a robust history of law enforcement "spectators" trying to railroad participants based on absolutely nothing, including in literal role playing scenarios. Privacy rights exist for a reason. http://www.sjgames.com/SS/ http://www.sjgames.com/SS/

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

pseudalopex 3y ago

The article had many good points. But many claims about LARP were not universal or not clear. Some performances are private. Some LARP is solo. The article acknowledged small groups but the table did not. People in many hobbies discuss law enforcement concerns, guidance to each other if confronted by an officer, and criminal cases where the hobby is mentioned. Role players have confirmation bias like other people. Some theatrical presentations have real antagonists.

Y-bar 3y ago
I did not read the article as being that black and white, rather as a set of rules of thumb. Such as if enough boxes are ticked the investigator should maybe consider that it is not a real LARPer, but rather someone who tries to hide behind a veil of LARPing.
- pseudalopex 3y ago
  The comment I replied to called the differences universal. The article said LARP is always group-based. Possibly the authors intended the other claims to be rules of thumb. Certainly their intended audience included people who tend to think in black and white. And several claims I contradicted were faulty rules of thumb.