Should the rule 0.0 be restored?

[Wesker]

Yo chill my internet is straight from alaska to finnland, not across the world.

---

[SnakThree]

We should start enforcing the rules that already exist first.

This.


On the other hand, staff should properly document unwritten rules to make them real rules.

---

[Karst]

The introductory paragraph of the rules in general, as well as the introduction to Rule 1, are kind of rule 0.0 substitutes.

Server Administrators are obliged:

• To develop and safeguard the health of the Discovery Freelancer community, official server, and forums. [...]
  

1. General Conduct:
   
   The intent of these rules is for everyone to be excellent to one another and to use common sense. Keep fair play in mind and have consideration for others. [...]

Do I think the rules might benefit from writing this out a bit better? Yeah, probably.
Some variant of "This is a roleplaying game. Engage in fairplay and treat others as you would expect to be treated." or some such would not hurt.

But I do also agree with the people saying that "don't be a dick" probably should not have to be written out in a multiplayer environment.

---

[Mercury]

I'm against ambiguous rules in general. A good rule is straightforward and can only be interpreted one way. Even if people are being fair to one another questionable situations arise and for that we need clear rules.

A very vague rule like 'Don't be mean' only opens up the possibility that anyone can be sanctioned over anything. Because it's not clear what 'mean' is and it becomes applicable in any situation.

[Karst]

The problem with that is this:

Because it seems to keep coming up, I guess? "I couldn't help but notice that the server rules don't say you aren't allowed to artificially force packet loss!" -> "Oh, I knew about packet loss but I didn't know I wasn't allowed to unplug my network cable mid-fight!" -> "Oh, you're telling me routing my connection from Europe to China, to South America, then back to Australia and then finally to the server in Finland is bad? It doesn't say it in the rules!" (Next they'll also route it over the moon because the rules only state that you're not allowed to do this across continents, doesn't say anything about stellar bodies)

Apparently that is why we need rule 0.0.

It's simply infeasible to write out every possible action that falls under vague rules like "fairplay", "exploit", or "powergaming", because certain people will always think of some type of bad behavior that we could not even have conceived of, much less included in the rules.
If anything, the longer the definitions of rules like that are, the more emboldened certain people might feel to consider anything outside of them to be fair game, while everyone else will be complaining about how convoluted and unfriendly to new players the rules are.

I'm a firm believer in the approach that we can reasonably expect players to know which kind of behavior is fair and which isn't, without needing to write everything out, and the vast majority of players do this just fine. I don't think we should tailor the rules to explain to the outliers, the scummiest rule-skirters around, every conceivable aspect of what can be done wrong.

---

[Mercury]

Still I believe most cases can be covered by simple categorized rules. Like in your case - Using VPNs or artifically forcing packet loss is forbidden.
I don't think fair judgements can be consistently made if we have a wildcard-rule that fits all situations and that concerns me event though I always aim to play fair.

I also see your point that cheaters can always find loopholes in the rules they can exploit and it's easier to create a general rule about good conduct. It's a decision to be made. I would start by analyzing how many players aim for deliberately evading rules. If too many it's better to create a general rule. If only a few - it's better to respect the well-behaving portion of the playerbase with clear rules.

[Haste]

Still I believe most cases can be covered by simple categorized rules. Like in your case - Using VPNs or artifically forcing packet loss is forbidden.

Ah. Well, too bad you forgot to mention that I'm not allowed to rent a botnet to DDOS my opponent mid-fight so I can kill them more easily.

There's always something else if you look hard enough. This one's a bit silly but I can list another 50 slightly more reasonable examples.

The rules cannot and will not ever be fully comprehensive. We will always have to always have an implicit "The staff may sanction you because you're doing things that really don't fly." rule. All that this thread is really discussing is whether that rule should be spelled out in the rules thread.

---

[Stewgar]

I'm not one to have writer's block when it comes to responding in threads such as this, but what else is there to say that hasn't been said.

This community has a people problem. Certain people manipulate rules or events because they must win, grief bases without RP, troll threads so that real discussion is impossible, or are unable to communicate with the other side or listen so that false perceptions and assumptions can be changed to understanding. Community leaders that don't have a yellow or green name that try, or have tried, to have discussions are constantly drowned out by toxic pukes that have nothing better to do than stir the pot.

The rules as they stand are decent, believe it or not. There's adjustments needing made for sure. With the patch coming I'm sure some rules must be changed to keep up with the mechanics of the mod. But until a certain segment of this community wakes up, grows up, or moves along, there is no change that can fix this community.

---

I hope that either all of us or none of us are judged by the actions of our weakest moments. But rather, by the strength we show when, and if, we're ever given a second chance.

[xenomorph]

One thing Loken hasn't particularly paid attention to, even though he's been very right, is common sense. Among many players, also the yeet-me-into-your-faction friends, or whatever term that you would like to use, there appears to be a fair share of hypocrites lacking basic reasoning.

From my perspective, spending more than 3-4 minutes chasing someone in that environment isn't worth it. That player has already escaped. Let's remember, it's just a game, and many seem to forget that. I can say the same for the one evading in-game death. Sure, some consequences can be imposed, but is it really worth allowing all this toxicity to dominate every discussion thread these days?

Everyone that I've shown this mod to made fun out of it, saying how "serious" everyone in here is.

Isn't it ironic how discussions are now taking place, while players have been avoiding interactions for ages using nonsensical machinery like infinite Jump Drives, and many more tools at their disposal? Players have always avoided interactions that wouldn't benefit them (because they'd die, I guess?). Jayce said something really realistic, I'll quote.

I'm going to acknowledge this roleplay when it benefits me, and ignore it when it doesn't. It really is that simple.

You can apply this to anything game-related in here.

People here consider it a personal attack if you merely log into the game. What else can I say? Same people hold their grudges for decades for whatever reason, waiting for someone to make a word on the forum to bite them, to "look cool."

True growth comes not in mastering the pixels on a screen but in mastering the art of maturity.

I am not justifying either of those players. I don't care. The more people leave, the more closed the community gets, and the more toxicity is created. Obviously, many enjoy this sort of environment.

[Czechmate]

Rules seem okay, staff just need to strive for consistency, and lack of bias - it wasn't nice when I got a mini-heavy decision against me over a year ago I must say because of personal antipathy, even though it was a tiny couple-day forum mute. 0.0 is sort of in-built into rules now.


@xenomorph no need to make people avoid each other into some drama - people just have different playstyles, when e.g. someone comes to /1/2 PvP they will be annoyed by someone just roleplaying at a safe distance and leave, and vice versa. There are also power traders not wanting to pay 10 million when they min-max, VHF players disliking cap fights, there's even players that avoid popular events because it's not their style, etc. etc. etc. - people, want to do more of what they like - unless players have great empathy and compromise, align your goals with theirs, people will just sort of naturally avoid each.