I agree with Orgris, i screened the Sanction Reports every day to get a better sence for the rules, so that i will do the mistakes not myself, and strengthen my own RP on this server.
But i think also, that half of the Reports are not necessary. The community should ask themselvs, if the reports are well forwarded to the admins, so that they can execute justice. :rtfm:
I guess to whisper with someone ingame in OORP brings more often success to get it right. And the Rule 0.0 is in my opinion an interpretation thing (maybe by admins). What should i do in Future? Report all outnumbered fights?
There is a very fine grey line between what you and I consider explaining and someone else considers rule lawyering. Especially if they are lolwutters or just feel like pricks and report you.
Show me what rule says that you can't "rules lawyer".
Thanks to MikeyH for the banner.
Reverend Del Wrote:I was going to turn your ship into something that would have been better named "Lada" but I was told to be nice.
' Wrote:Show me what rule says that you can't "rules lawyer".
If one simply gleans over the recent sanction reports and past reports you will notice rule lawyering is sanction-able.
However, if one isn't capable of reading the rules or any sanction reports:
Quote:3.3 Out-of-character (OOC) chat must not be used in system or local chat. OOC communication in group or private chat between players will cease if one player requests it. Admins are free to communicate with any player at any time.
Rule lawyering is a OOC chat. Therefore in violation of the above rule. Not to mention no on likes it.
There is a difference between rule lawyering and trying to help. A fine one, but luckily the admins get to decided where that line lays if a report is filed. Read both Malexa's and Agmen's posts though.
This is worth saying again:
Quote:First off - did you do it in PM's or in system chat? Then, did you actually listen to what the other guy had to say - or did you just throw it back at him? Telling the guy that you're talking to that you want to check on the neural net is perfectly acceptable - because the rules are always right here on the forums.
Take your tempers and your testosterone out of it. The tone you set in your comments makes a world of difference in how we view things. While there is still some subjectiveness from us on it, we try to err on the side of not doing something if not needed.
' Wrote:We on the admin team have both rule 1.2 and rule 1.3.
1.2 Server administrators will impose sanctions on players for violating server rules and for any actions that harm server gameplay.
1.3 Administrators are obliged:
- To ensure work of Discovery Freelancer server;
- To be fair and treat all players equally, independent of their level and faction alignment;
- Not to mix server roleplaying with server administration in any way;
- Not to ignore any cases of server rules violations that are reported.
Before I say anything else,
I have no issue with Agmen of Eladesor or any other Admin in their enforcing of the rules, I am stating my observation of a possible loophole in 5.6 that the recent sanction has illustrated to me.
' Wrote:There have also been numerous discussions AND a very nice rules tutorial written by someone (pats self on back) that describes how this rule works in furballs. This wasn't a furball. This was a disengagement due to overwhelming firepower showing up on one side.
I would totally agree if it were another player ship that chased him off. from reading the sanction report it did not sound like he ran away from another player ship, he left the area of a base. . .the Essex did not "show up" but it was rather "fled to". When did running from an NPC or NPC base become fleeing?
' Wrote:Put the shoe on the other foot - you're an Order pilot being chased by a bounty hunter and you get close enough to Isis that it drives the hunter off. If he sticks around within 10K - it's all good, he can wait on you to come back out. If he gets 11K or more out - he's disengaged and must leave Minor. Before you complain about us enforcing the rules on one player - think about how we have to enforce them on ALL players. And don't ever think that I would hesitate to sanction a BHG| pilot if he broke the rules.
Ok, but if. . .
The Order player being chased escaped to 11k of the bounty hunter in open space, wouldn't it then be defined as the Order Player fleeing?
The Bounty hunter stopped chasing 11k from the Isis, and the Order player continued there, wouldn't it also be defined as the Order Player fleeing?
In your example and in both my alternate scenarios one simple fact remains : The Order ship is running away from the Bounty hunter!
How then could there be another outcome besides "The Order Player Fled"?
perhaps adding a "C" to 5.6 in the spirit of stopping people from the "I didn't dock, so I didn't flee" defense when they flee to a base. taking a battle close to your base makes sense, but simply hiding behind one to avoid the dock fleeing rule isn't quite right IMO.
Quote:5.6 Fleeing in combat counts as a PVP death. Fleeing is:
a) Docking with a jump gate, station or tradelane;
b) Moving more than 10km from the fight c) "hiding" in close proximity of a friendly base for more than 10 minutes to avoid definitions A and B.
' Wrote:If one simply gleans over the recent sanction reports and past reports you will notice rule lawyering is sanction-able.
However, if one isn't capable of reading the rules or any sanction reports:
Rule lawyering is a OOC chat. Therefore in violation of the above rule. Not to mention no on likes it.
There is a difference between rule lawyering and trying to help. A fine one, but luckily the admins get to decided where that line lays if a report is filed. Read both Malexa's and Agmen's posts though.
This is worth saying again:
Dude, I read those sanction reports religiously. Don't try to lecture me.
The only sanctions that have ever happened that I've seen have always had to do with someone insinuating that the person who broke the rules was going to have a sanction report filled out by them.
And duh, you shouldn't fill local or system chat with it.
Please don't assume I'm an idiot. I've been playing on the server for over half a year. And I actually went on the forum and read all the rules before I even got on the server for the first time.
Thanks to MikeyH for the banner.
Reverend Del Wrote:I was going to turn your ship into something that would have been better named "Lada" but I was told to be nice.
Wow. So this thread turns into a "U/NO U" match, as Agmen puts it.
Either way, contacting them on private, with //messages explaining that they have broken a rule is not going to get you sanctioned.
For the record, Cross, 3.3 has little to do with it.
' Wrote:3.4 Threatening other players with reports and sanctions, attempting to pose as an Admin and using an Admin's name without permission is not allowed.
' Wrote:What this server really needs is a 13.37 rule; Admins are right, you are wrong, if we think you're being annoyin, you are banned, i think we can trust the admins enough with that at least.