Regarding On-Forum "Green-Texts" and current state of our rules

[sindroms]

Right, to be quite frank, the current state of this thread is rather problematic in terms of what information it gives for players of both new and experienced nature. The fact that we have had so many discussions regarding the current ruleset only proves that statement.

It seems as though for every clarification made in green, nobody bothers to actually write it down. It leads to the situation when someone ingame asks you a relatively forward question, such as what does Escorting mean within the context of server rules and all you can say is that "There is a clarification in admin-green SOMEWHERE ON THE FORUM".

Actually, there are so many "somewhere on the forum" clarifications, it is not even funny anymore. Someone at some point did get a thread going to find and document all of the admin-green-texts on the forum, but that one seems to have been lost to the passage of time already. Even more so, such information does not get appended to the rules thread anyway.





Impy had the right idea about this situation, that the administration team should make a statement that all previous admin-green clarifications that were previously posted are void and create a thread for members to submit and then for them to specifically admin-green clarify and append them to a new reply in the rules section.

Another thing that the rules set is lacking is a list of terminology used. The only ones that are currently present are entries for Metagaming and Powergaming, which are vague at best. Escorting, Trading, Allying - those would be the three more blurry examples of words being used in terms of either the rules writeup or ingame IDs.

Examples in general seem to have been completely absent in the rules. While those are sometimes found in forum tutorials, the players would benefit from them being found in the same thread. I've seen my fair share of players asking about examples on how PVP death works in terms of fleeing or the ever-persistent questions on how ''valid roleplay'' differs from ''engagement notices''.

Some rules lines are just misleading, such as current writeup of 1.3
It should state that "Every player must have one ID present on their ship.", because the original purpose of this rule was to avoid players having multiple IDs in their hold, where other players could not tell which one was mounted at the time.

3.1 is not even physically possible anymore due to the new FLhook plugin.

3.3 has no description of what a trade vessel is. It also has no explanation how lawfuls should deal with transports used for piracy as they are trade vessels which is obviously not used for trading.

3.0 is so vague at this point, that the roleplay required before attacking could be written on the forum or done the previous day or in system chat.

1.1 does not mention what constitutes as such material - seeing though as players have been sanctioned for using words that have been used in TV programming or do not exist in the swear filter.

2.2 should specifically state WHY a player should not be doing this. Without context, this rule literally means nothing to a player reading it for the first time.

4.2 isn't even relevant anymore due to the tracker not taking conn time into account.

I am sure you peeps can point out other moments as well.
If you have been keeping track on our feedback or comments in places like Youtube or ModDB, you will know that the subject of our rules and guidelines is often the first thing that comes up. It is just a bit of a mess. So the obvious question is, can it be un-messed or do we lack the people to do so again?

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[nOmnomnOm]

Yeah I agree that green text should be collected and perhaps even pinned somewhere at least together. From there it should be edited into the rules because it shows how unclear they are.

The terminology should be at the top of the rules section defined since they are specific to the rules section.

Oh and just to add... 'Generic ID/Faction' should be also defined.
Im really interested in that one.

---

[Arioch]

It's actually not SOMEWHERE ON THE FORUMS anymore. The collection of Admin green text outside the primary rule list is pinned above it. It's titled "Community Collected Admin Greentext" by Wperegrine.

I do agree though that the rules are in desperate need of an update, and it's in progress. Just takes time.

---

[The Savage]

Such a thing would do, since I was mislead by what escorting means - for 3-4 years straight. :|

Also, about engagement notices, from what I remember (post is lost due to rollback), the engagement notice is completely optional if player have concluded the roleplay already AND both players are obviously hostile. I'd like clarification regarding that if after year this is still the case.

Edit: Yes, there's green text collection from what I recall as well.

Edit #2:

Oh and just to add... 'Generic ID/Faction' should be also defined.
Im really interested in that one.

Generic ID is Pirate, Freelancer and Miner ID. Faction ID is the rest. Yet there is the only ID fitting both groups, which belongs to Zoners, given their quite special status.

[sindroms]

It's actually not SOMEWHERE ON THE FORUMS anymore. The collection of Admin green text outside the primary rule list is pinned above it. It's titled "Community Collected Admin Greentext" by Wperegrine.

I do agree though that the rules are in desperate need of an update, and it's in progress. Just takes time.

Which is completely lost if a member accesses the rules via the toolbar on the top of the page.
It would be nice if they would be included in the main rules list as collapsables underneath the relevant rule entries.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[nOmnomnOm]

How about even a "FAQ" section and put it there?

---