Announcement Regarding Rule 1.2

[Thyrzul]

It is not mandatory to be an arse to get into trouble, all you need to have is a good few people pissed off crying loud enough that the Admins notice it.

Let's bring LPI or GRP as an example, their lores include that they are corrupted, either by money (LPI) or by influence/power (GRP). These are features making them unique among the house police factions, but dare I try to play them out, it won't take too long to get "lawful piracy" and such phrases thrown at me, eventually ending up on probation. And I didn't even had to troll people, only try something out I though is well within the rules but I rarely see.

Oh but wait a moment, corrupt policemen harassing their own citizens, isn't that trolling? Yes, inRP trolling, justified by lore, but who will care if enough people complain about it? How am I to know if it's still inRP or already ooRP trolling?

Thing is, there are interesting activities nearing a border we cannot see, because the vagueness we have neither closes holes, nor leaves them open, but leaves the option for Admins to make up their mind on the run about what's too much and what isn't. All this "spirit of the rules" thing is too vague and left for interpretation, but god forbid you dare to think differently than the Admins. Learn to read their minds, and you'll be fine.

---

[7AlphaOne1]

Gawd!


People, dont overrage. it all sounds as if you all are raging! just a reminder on a rule folks, no need to panic.


well, I for one, am fine with the rule. if wrongly sanctioned(correct me on this) you can always explain and demand your toys back.


somewhat like you are playing with toys. your toy cant kungfu and fly into the air. it gets taken away. but if you have a ramp, you dan say it flew by it, and get your toy back. simple, aint it?

---

Need some software for FL?looking of a whole database? click here!

Jay's Quotes

TO FLOOD OR NOT TO FLOOD, THAT IS THE QUESTION.

Well, I've managed to piss off Snak3, Ageira, LH~, Furries, Wisp, but at least Beast is happy.

[n00bl3t]

if wrongly sanctioned(correct me on this) you can always explain and demand your toys back.

Let me know how "demanding" goes.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[Zen_Mechanics]

Somehow the people that fight back are the ones who are being warned and banned. Punishments in the digital world is legal, just as it is ilegal to ban someone from a website without evidence. The FBI deals with such websites and europe has its own agency for that. The rules are not yet fully implemented because of this new era and there are many setbacks in it. But if you actually bother hiring a laywer you can make a case, especaily in europe - which suffered brutal human right violations and such, and the judge doesn't care if its done on the internet or in person. If you take a website that has a different set of rules ( and they can do that ) it must not conflict with the international ones. That's why capitalism + democracy + human rights work so great in the western world. So if you are a website administrator who gets his service in countries that have laws on discrimination, freedom of expression, freedom by law and the right to present himself/herself - you are obligated to follow them. Wouldn't make sense for american websites to break their own stated rights isnt it.

---

Were fools to make war on our brothers in arms.

[Mímir]

Somehow the people that fight back are the ones who are being warned and banned.

only trolls complained so far... allegedly - [Tunicle]

Ok gentlemen, do you really think this is conducive to a positive discussion? Do you have any proof to back up those accusations? Mr. Tel-Aviv, since you are an avid student of law, can you please explain the concept of libel to me?

Perhaps some of the people that complain do so because they have been around for long enough, and know enough of how this place has worked in the past and how it works in the present to actually object?

Let's pack away the ad hominem, k?

I totally see the positive winds the admin statement brought about already, btw.

---

[Zen_Mechanics]

The very fact that you reject what I've stated and try to put a laughing face on my comments that I find you to be among the ones who reject these things for real, as in - in real life. I might just file a 1.2 because my feelings are deeply heart by that statement, and you won't be given a voice before hand, only afterward. If you can't see the wrong in what I have just said - then theres something wrong with you. The Idea that someone can be airbrushed like a fly in a kitchen for hurting someone's feelings "allegedly" is what I'm against, and this rule "update" gives license to do just that. I'm not saying the admins aren't human and can't distingiush right/wrong, but I am skeptical about their success rates. You may have a different view point on how to deal with "criminals" - but even criminals deserve some status, even if I don't like it - we have a society thats built on rules and rights and while I may disagree on alot of issues, the society functions.

Justice can't always be made - but rules such as these only increases the chance of wrongly accusing someone.

---

Were fools to make war on our brothers in arms.

[Sath]

The very fact that you reject what I've stated and try to put a laughing face on my comments that I find you to be among the ones who reject these things for real, as in - in real life. I might just file a 1.2 because my feelings are deeply heart by that statement, and you won't be given a voice before hand, only afterward......

There you go, one of the many possibilities of exploiting the so-called modified, 1.2 rule. The very reason that the admins excercise uncontrolled powers, under no supervision makes the players feel more bad each and every time they pirate/ or do anything that the opposite player might not like. (who likes being pirated apart from the few ones that enjoy the interaction?). Though what he does is completely ok, the grievance of some might lead to him feeling crap inside whenever he logs and pirates a trader.

Admins are humans too, and at some situations, decisions might indeed be biased/not properly reviewed/not justified. The only tool to prevent this was the clear presentation of evidence, that is submitted by the one who reports (which prevent everyone and their grandmas whining in front of the admins without any evidence over some simple incident) and is given as a justification for the punishment, to the accused (since, he has to know what he was accused of, and what wrong he did, in what situation.) If this is not how the system works, then you can see players having a crushing feeling each and every time they pirate. This would, eventually lead to a lesser enjoyable gameplay, but rather a screwed up one, where each step is like walking in a minefield. No one would like that...atleast not me and a few of the others that I know of.

[Highland Laddie]

Justice can't always be made - but rules such as these only increases the chance of wrongly accusing someone.

But you also seem to be suggesting that the Admins who do the banning are someone mindless idiots incapable of seeing into situations, and give no amount of forethought into their verdicts when banning people. Maybe they're not legal geniuses, but I'm at least willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Also, there is an appeal process in place as well, and over the past year we've seen banned people come back from the banning and resume play, and we've also seen people get banned, then have their bans over-turned. So, this imaginary injustice you guys fear so much...I just don't see it.

[Thyrzul]

Laddie, it was not too long ago when I've seen evidence of a particular admin questioning a player in a way suggesting said admin is not even aware of some of the server rules and/or admin policies. Would such not occur I'd not be concerned about possible signs of incompetency, but my personal experience is that such things occur. Pair incompetency with vagueness of server rule interpretation and see the results yourself.

---

[Highland Laddie]

Laddie, it was not too long ago when I've seen evidence of a particular admin questioning a player in a way suggesting said admin is not even aware of some of the server rules and/or admin policies. Would such not occur I'd not be concerned about possible signs of incompetency, but my personal experience is that such things occur. Pair incompetency with vagueness of server rule interpretation and see the results yourself.

Again...this is why there is more than 1 Admin calling all the shots, as well as an appeal process.