I tend to believe that military leaders should avoid creative orders at all costs; by which I mean, give orders that are clearly and conventionally within the purview of normal BM behavior, not rules that lend themselves to hair-splitting like we are presently doing.
I agree with this, but what we think as to how military leaders should give orders, and what is an IR violation when giving orders are two completely different things.
As far as the previous cases, in general this case is not like either of them. The first case regarding Malus explictly stated a punishment for a time sensitive issue that was impossible to perform regardless of OOC activity. This case cannot be connected to that one simply because the requested action IS able to be performed, not only in an OOC sense but an IC sense as well. In addition, the players involved were both online at the time and sent messages explicitly regarding disobeying the orders.
While I don't believe the 2nd case applies here, it is much more applicable than the first. The player clearly issued a stated punishment for failure to follow a stated action. The reason I think the judgement in the 2nd case does not apply is simply that the player proved that their not following the order was due to an IC reason not an OOC one. They had both the capability to follow the order, and determined independently not to. Also, since the punishment statement was issued after the player had chosen not to follow the orders, I think it is not an IR violation.
