Order|Tau-1, Order|Hi-3, Order|Echo-7, Order|Nihilum have been sanctioned for:
Quote:2.6 - Every character must have only one type of ID equipped and must play according to the role and restrictions of that ID. Additional restrictions may be highlighted in red on ship, commodity, and equipment infocards. If ID restrictions and allowances conflict with the server rules, the ID overrides the rules (except 2.8 and 3.4).
Consequences:
You don't have a piracy line that allows you to demand non-Nomad materials. Nor was the Freelancer a 'Hostile' Entity.
Loss of weapons and credits, Sanction Notice in your holds. (Credits were taken from other ships to make up the shortfall).
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
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
Order|Tau-1, Order|Hi-3, and Order|Nihilum followed my explicit orders. As a result, they are not responsible for the situation. Please feel free to take any additional credits and weapons that you wish from my other ships, and please return all extra credits and weapons to my colleagues.
My apologies to my dear friends for falling "victim" to the absurd controversy. In the end, this mod is a private property that is in a great state of decay. You made the right decision by following my orders. My sincere congratulations go out to you for your courage.
St Denis, would you kindly lift the sanctions that you had imposed on my friends and impose harsher sanctions on me?
After having examined the evidence, we can partly see why the sanction was handed out, however we would like to dispute the harshness and extent:
To start, allow me to describe the situation as I understand it occured based on the evidence:
An Order| patrol ran into two Freelancers at Freeport 11, one of which was carrying a nomad powercell and remains, the other was carrying APM materials.
The Order patrol demanded the nomad materials as per the ID lines, to which the nomad material carrying player in question docked. (while talking mind you, not a loldock)
At this point the Order patrol turned their attention to the other player, who was carrying APM hardware. A commodity that the Order laws state is to be seized and destroyed.
One Order pilot then attempted to enforce that law.
During the fight, one Order pilot decided assistance was required and pitched in.
Near the end of the fight, the Order pilot asked for assistance, ordering the two remaining members to join in.
Disappointment in ganking from our members aside, the first point we would like to mention is this:
The entire sanction is rooted on what appears to be a technicallity: being punished for enforcing (staff approved) laws because the ID line is lacking.
Only very specific factions have laws listed on the forums and nearly all of them have the 'can enforce x laws in y space' line on their ID. Infact the Order appears to be one of the very few factions that has dedicated laws, that does not have this line on their ID. While we do not dispute our lack of this ID line, it seems to be an oversight nobody has realized until now. Were it not for this presumed oversight, no breach would have occured.
Now to clarify this point, we are not disputing ID lines were not followed, we are saying that there was no malicious intent behind the action.
The players in question believed they were enforcing laws they were allowed to enforce.
The second point is regarding engaging the freelancer that did not dock:
Given that the Order laws can't currently be enforced, a Freelancer with APM hardware would indeed not be an appropriate target. The player initiating the attack is in the wrong given this technicality.
(I would, however, argue that a Freelancer with a buddy that has a Nomad powercell and Nomad remains, that also refuses to comply, is highly suspicious from an inrp standpoint.)
That said, during the fight, eventually one Order pilot moved in to assist, and later 2 more were ordered to do so. Server rules state that any ID is allowed to defend allies, and the rest only got involved once it became clear that defending their ally was needed (one by own evaluation, the other two by being ordered).
Given this we would like to request the sanction to be softened for the pilots that did not initiate the infraction.
There was no ill intent nor did they have any reason to think they weren't allowed to enforce official Order laws.
As for the ID limitation, now this has been brought to our attention we intend to file a request to have the ID amended to prevent such mishaps from occuring in the future.
Indeed you do not have the 'enforcement' allowance on your ID. It is unlikely that you would ever get that 'allowance' (in my opinion) due to you having an unlimited ZOI as can be seen by your ID.
Quote:This Independent Intelligence official faction ID is used by members of the Order Primary Fleet, who:
- Can attack any ship to protect allies.
- Can attack any ship within Omicron Epsilon and Omicron Mu.
- Can attack Combat Ships belonging to factions considered hostile by the Order.
- Can attack non-allied Intelligence factions, and ships using Nomad equipment.
- Can demand Nomad Materials.
Those IDs that do have it, have a very limited ZOI.
Those IDs that have a very large ZOI, may have 'Laws', but none of them have the 'enforcement ' line in their ID.
You do have a line that allows you to "demand Nomad Materials".
Quote:"Nomad Materials" - Artifacts, Sorted Artifacts, Xeno Artifacts, Liquid Cardamine, Nomad Power Cells, Nomad Remains, and Azurite Gas.
And this allows you to go anywhere and demand it.
There is nothing stopping you putting a Perk Request in, to have the ability to demand APM Munitions, added to your ID.
Quote:That said, during the fight, eventually one Order pilot moved in to assist, and later 2 more were ordered to do so. Server rules state that any ID is allowed to defend allies, and the rest only got involved once it became clear that defending their ally was needed (one by own evaluation, the other two by being ordered).
The ability to defend 'allies' would have been appropiate if the Freelancer had attacked, but having one attack, when he shouldn't of, just compounded the offence when the others also jumped in.
Another OF was recently warned for the same reason.
Quote:2.6 - Every character must have only one type of ID equipped and must play according to the role and restrictions of that ID. Additional restrictions may be highlighted in red on ship, commodity, and equipment infocards. If ID restrictions and allowances conflict with the server rules, the ID overrides the rules (except 2.8 and 3.4).
It is the responsibility of all Players to read their ID and understand the pros and cons of it.
In the same way that ignorance of House Laws isn't a defence (when Players are caught by the Local Enforcement), ignorance of your ID restrictions is not a defence.
With all this said, the Team will discuss.
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person