(08-04-2014, 05:43 PM)Captain_Nemo Wrote: inRP requires both sides to be willing to accept the outcome of that interaction
If I am on a trader and encounter a pirate, the pirate wants to pirate me for 1 million credits but I only want to accept the outcome of losing 500.000 credits but I can't get to this goal through any means, is the interaction of ooRP nature? Sometimes you can not affect the outcome as much as you want to, but you have to live with it nonetheless.
Your character should face the responsibilities for his/her actions (becoming a trader, refusing to cooperate etc). If you can't deal with certain consequences from your characters actions, you should try to avoid those actions. Even better, find an inRP solution to your problems. Opting out of it through ooRP means is not a good way, instead you can create some RP that'll eventually help you get rid of any issues.
If you can't face this conflict through inRP measures, then a roleplay server is not something you might enjoy for long anyway.
(08-04-2014, 05:43 PM)Captain_Nemo Wrote: inRP requires both sides to be willing to accept the outcome of that interaction
If I am on a trader and encounter a pirate, the pirate wants to pirate me for 1 million credits but I only want to accept the outcome of losing 500.000 credits but I can't get to this goal through any means, is the interaction of ooRP nature? Sometimes you can not affect the outcome as much as you want to, but you have to live with it nonetheless.
Your character should face the responsibilities for his/her actions (becoming a trader, refusing to cooperate etc). If you can't deal with certain consequences from your characters actions, you should try to avoid those actions. Even better, find an inRP solution to your problems. Opting out of it through ooRP means is not a good way, instead you can create some RP that'll eventually help you get rid of any issues.
If you can't face this conflict through inRP measures, then a roleplay server is not something you might enjoy for long anyway.
I'm not saying you are wrong, but the example you have provided doesn't even come close to matching what this situation entails, this isn't a pirate and a trader having a bad interaction, these are two Zoners basically getting in a fight over authority of a station that inRP belongs to what ever official faction "controls it" in this sense I believe it is Phoenix but I could be wrong.
as said earlier this most likely will require admin intervention, I do not see this coming to any sort of resolution from the player's behind the characters.
(08-04-2014, 05:43 PM)Captain_Nemo Wrote: inRP requires both sides to be willing to accept the outcome of that interaction
If I am on a trader and encounter a pirate, the pirate wants to pirate me for 1 million credits but I only want to accept the outcome of losing 500.000 credits but I can't get to this goal through any means, is the interaction of ooRP nature? Sometimes you can not affect the outcome as much as you want to, but you have to live with it nonetheless.
Your character should face the responsibilities for his/her actions (becoming a trader, refusing to cooperate etc). If you can't deal with certain consequences from your characters actions, you should try to avoid those actions. Even better, find an inRP solution to your problems. Opting out of it through ooRP means is not a good way, instead you can create some RP that'll eventually help you get rid of any issues.
If you can't face this conflict through inRP measures, then a roleplay server is not something you might enjoy for long anyway.
Well, just pointing out that a trader that refuses to cooperate with a pirate is effectively accepting and thereby agreeing to the RP consequences of the outcome, whether it is getting blown up or escaping.
But as Nemo pointed out, it's not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison.
I rushed to find a simple comparison. Anyway, I hope you see what I'm getting at. In any case, maybe the parties in this conflict should try to handle this like adults and find a proper inRP solution to this.
Just because you spam the "call" button on Skype, insult me and come up with riddiculous purely OORP connections between my characters, doesn't mean you're right to go dictator on all the Freeports . You're only trying to get rid of me because of my actions as completely separate character. You cannot INRP prove anything, all of this is just effect of conversation we had yesterday.
n00blet, unlike Gytrash has my full confidence in handling my Skype logs. Allthrough I would ask to keep the insults censured from it, since they were given by both sides quite regularly and this forum is for everyone.
Face it, you hate me - I see nothing wrong in it as long it stays on OORP level, not flooding into the RP environment.
In an ideal world I wouldn't even have a voice on who runs the freeports. To be honest apart from Freeport 11 and Freeport XV I don't have a voice (Except for maybe freeport 5, I'll have to get back to you on that one). The problem is that when someone decides to leave/take a break/stop RPing a freeport administrator and they are part of the CoF. The most common thing is for them to go "Here's a Freeport Gy, sort it out.". And so I do.
Freeport 9, corfu base and Freeport 11 were assigned by me. Apart from Freeport 11 they had no caveats, it was pretty much, you have zoner characters, they work pretty well, you've shown an interest, you seem like the best choice, here's a freeport.
For Freeport 11 I did things differently. Freeport 11 was inRP the domain and kingdom of Marrvin, that's all I remember of his name, Camtheman's character. inRP it had a lot of stuff going on that I personally (As a character) disagreed with. So when the time came to pick the station administrator I sent out the call. And when I selected the station administrator I made it clear that there was going to be oversight.
Now, considering that I made Golanski the administrator (And let me tell you not everyone was happy about that. People in OSI included) one of the caveats that he accepted was that he was going to reign in his order characters. He had previously used information that had been bandied about in the CoF skypechat to disrupt, or state his intention to disrupt, planned Zoner events and RP.
So I said, unless your character is informed about it don't go in and mess it up. Or your zoner character is gone and you're out of this chat.
The Baffin summit was the last straw, his order admiral turns up in full battleship regalia and starts messing things up. His character that inRP had no way of knowing about the event and no real eason for being there at exactly that time. Then his character slips out of the station put into lockdown to defend the delegates against the actions of Golanski and flies away into the sunset unmolested.
Not happy with that decision at all. I was in fact infuriated because up until this point I had done a lot of defending of Golanski against other people who were very much against him being in the chat at all. I had thought he would keep to our agreement because he had been doing pretty well.
No such luck, so I acted on what I had said I would do years earlier and kicked him out. Now Noobl3t is trying to set himself up as administrator, I mean, there's no real actual way for me to remove an administrator from a Freeport inRP without it being powergaming if the other party does not agree. That's why in future I will be getting signed contracts handed back in stating acceptance of the contract instead of just a verbal one.
But seriously, if anyone knows of a way that I can RP this then please contact me. I'm at my wits end here.
Another thing is that a CoF elected administrator can be removed by a majority vote, if you don't like me leading it, talk to the rest of the people in it. If they vote to kick me out of the head position, or even entirely I won't cause a fuss.
Edit:
To furnish this I have said as much in the Confederation chat. Readded Golanski and removed myself. It is now up to them to decide whether or not they wish for me to continue administering the Freeports as I have been.
just to say that I am ok with what Gytrash did since it seems there was an oorp agreement behind it. However, for the future I think it would be better to elect admins of freeports instead of nominate them. Administrating a freeport is a duty but also a source of fun for the player. And I think anybody deserve such position if he has the skills for it. Personally I don't think the nomination process allows anybody to reach the admin position. So that's why I propose an election for future freeport admins. Note that the election could be inrp or oorp (I would prefer inrp, even if it's still ok to have also oorp discussion about it).
It would be also great if we could have different players managing the different freeports.
Now for the current conflict about Freeport 11, I would recommend to solve it oorp and then to find a inrp story to play the solution.
edit: also, to avoid what's currently happening, we should define some oorp rules about the management of the freeports in the future.
I see the COF these days has turned into OSI subsidiary/catch all the Freeports game. When I made my way to your group, it has been all about helping out unaffilated Zoners settle stuff with FR5 - nowadays it's reducing personal freedom and opressing of independents unless they do as you want them to do. Fortunatelly not everyone wishes to do your bidding, even as independent Zoner.
I think I have to thank you concerning of removal me from the chat.
![[Image: O2vt8So.png]](https://i.imgur.com/O2vt8So.png)
![[Image: E9d8RnV.jpg?1]](http://i.imgur.com/E9d8RnV.jpg?1)
![[Image: 9KgNaeX.png]](http://i.imgur.com/9KgNaeX.png)