If you require evidence, you may request such via PM from a Staff member. Only the accused or an official faction leader of the accused person's faction may request such. Once you have the evidence, and if you wish to dispute it, you may post in the Sanction Thread below. Do not continue PM'ing a staff member, as that will result in your Appeal being denied. If you PM a staff or post in the sanction thread and you are not directly involved, you are consenting to be subjected to the reprisal of my choice which may involve in game repercussions up to a ban. Blaming members of your immediate family, neighbors, friends, pets, and assorted Orcs, Trolls and any other legendary creatures may result in the use of Admin Right #CTE 750AE
--------------
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
----------
Is hardly related to anything besides telling that the 101st will not speak on communications also available to the NC. No reason for a FR at all here.
The ship that gathered the intel is cloaked and shows the 101st char as hostile. From what we know, the ship was Oracle| tagged and the very same player and even char that posted the intel under the CID flag. There's no record of how this information made it from the Oracles, which are an entirely own faction, to the NC.
The dsa-logs provided there are easy to manipulate and therefor don't count as hard evidence to execute a FR, less an FR5.
[11.12.2016 00:45:28] [Admin]Clavius: Hi I'm a catfish and I like to eat jellybeans.
[11.12.2016 00:45:40] [Admin]Sindroms: Lets randomly ban some people because why not?
[11.12.2016 00:46:11] [Admin]Clavius: Because Reasons!
Having my char powergamed to be taken hostage ("into custody") without being shown any evidence beforehand and leaving that char then to those captors whim is considered valid RP now that allows, if denied, a FR at all?
All in all, there's no hard evidence. Show me screenshots.
The 101st requests this sanction to be reverted as the method of collecting the information that led to this FR5 is in violation with the rules lined out for faction creation.
Quote:Faction Membership
First of all: player is owner of the account. Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).
Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
As the char in question who gathered the intel was on an Oracle| tagged ship, yet still is the very same character played in the NC's CID (Mercante), its actions are in violation with the rules set upon the NC and Oracles| upon the creation of their factions.
With this, the 101st asks all RP-evidence collected by said character to be nullified.
Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).
Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
The Character is only Oracle tagged and not both NC- and Oracles.
If it would write a comm to itself and sent itself the evidence would it be okay for you? Because that's what would have normally happened if it weren't the same person.
Character is a character on this account (up to 5 on each account).
Each character can only be part of one faction. Different characters from one account can be part of different factions.
The Character is only Oracle tagged and not both NC- and Oracles.
If it would write a comm to itself and sent itself the evidence would it be okay for you? Because that's what would have normally happened if it weren't the same person.
So you're telling me that the character Marietta Mercante (http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1848508) doesn't also have an NC- tag, yet is a crucial part of the NC's lore by playing out the head of the NC's Intelligence Division called the CID?
Your own faction-list begs to differ:
Quote:NC-Mercante 00:46:13 00:00:00
And having Mercante send a transmission to Mercante or Mercante sending one from the Oracles| to the NC's CID in this case doesn't magically solve the fact that the same character is still flying under two official faction tags.
There's not really any difference between having a char being double-tagged (which is against the rules) and having the same inRP-character fly for two official factions under two separate names.
So, since this is essentially about me, I think I should add my two cents. I won't address the RP itself, as it has already been deemed alright by the admin team, hence the FR5, which is not a sanction but more of a notice/heads-up, by the way.
I should prefix this by saying that I am rather amused that you are going for the undoing of the RP when I explicitly asked you on Skype whether you wanted it removed, to which you ended up saying you're not a guy for retconning. Instead of dancing around the issue, why not simply tell me you're not having fun and instead run to the admins crying about a rule that you took out of context, which I will prove to you systematically in a moment. I am not going to post the logs of our conversation here, Divine, since it is more a notice to you to maybe consider next time that some people aren't willing to play your bashful game and instead tell them what you want explicitly, especially when they explicitly ask you whether you want X.
To the rule itself. It has already been pointed out multiple times in the other flame thread that character in the context of the rule you so avidly quoted means the ship on the account and not the roleplay character. Why would I say that, though? I have no evidence, right? Let's take a look at the recent approved SRPs and see what people have been up to, for example. This is Wolfram Kruppstahl, an RFP officer of the official faction who is also infected and using the Wilde. (see the Wild character list in the tracker) and also flying the RFP| tag. According to the rule you dug up, something like this shouldn't be possible, because roleplay characters cannot be in more than one faction, right? And this is the point where your argument falls apart. Do you think the admins did not look at this SRP request and would have considered what you quoted if it had any relevance and wasn't just to prevent something like RFP|Wilde.Wolfram.Kruppstahl?
Let's take a look at some more examples, shall we? Enma Loyola. Like before, it states clearly that the character is supposed to be a Wild infiltrating the National Council for the purposes of steering it however the Nomads want. Enma Loyola wasn't just in NC-, Aoi Iseijin, but also in the Oracle faction, which makes this one a tripple killer according to the already debunked argument. Needless to say, the admins saw this and saw no issue, because what you quoted does not apply. But let's say we take SRPs out of the equation. Goro Yoshida would be an example of one of the most famous undercover operating characters. He is an Oracle, as well as a Lane Hacker. I really wonder why nobody ever called him out on that.
To bring this to a close, just like Kruppstahl, just like Enma, and just like Yoshida, my character has an SRP that has been reviewed by the admins and approved. There is roleplay backing up her role and how she got there if you care to read the RP links in the request. This does not prevent my character from having ships of either faction besides the one I SRP'd (which is without any tag, mind you). Like I already told you in Skype before you removed me from your contact list, you get cranky when someone is not agreeing with your premises or arguments based on hot air, false equivalences (like the thing you quoted) and logical fallacies. What you state cannot make sense because it would lead all the character's RP listed above ad absurdum because they would violate the rule according to you.
No report, no action taken. Do I really have to file one besides the metagaming that using the same charater inRP on two differently tagged faction-ships is in violation with the rules the factions agreed upon when creating their factions?
You can take this post for it: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread...pid1851363
//Edit: I also wish to remind the staff of:
(12-22-2016, 07:53 PM)Divine Wrote:
(07-13-2016, 12:58 PM)The National Council Wrote: The National Council
07-13-2016, 01:58 PM, (This post was last modified: 12-16-2016, 04:16 PM by The National Council.)
(12-21-2016, 08:45 AM)sindroms Wrote: [101st] have been FR5ed to be hostile the the Outcasts.
Yesterday was the 21st, the bounty was put up on the 16th. That's 5 days ahead of any FR issued. And you can't just bounty your own ID without an FR issued first, as it's violating the rule 4.4 by using the bounty-board as a proxy.
(12-24-2016, 12:18 AM)Divine Wrote: Any update on this? I suspect most of the staff being involved eventually into the troubles around keeping the server up and clean, but is there an estimated ETA when a decision may be reached or any info on what's the overall course now?
//Edit: Nevermind that post. Just keep up the good work in saving the server for now. We'll meet again after the holidays, I guess.
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Some random logs
![[Image: maYSx8o.png]](https://i.imgur.com/maYSx8o.png)