Player targetted abuse for in-game actions

[Bael]

Personally i dont like the way "Jason" plays the game. He "Destroy" opposition with brute force... force them to leave island, force people to secede, give away regions etc. I guess all is within the rules... but still too brutal on my taste. I have not realized before this incident how damn serious those guys are when they play this game... scary.

-jaune

While your opinion is perhaps somewhat accurate, the examples from which you your derive your conclusion are less so. From what I witnessed, Jason actually had very little to do with the terms that were proposed to Eston.

[Dante Silverfire]

While I do have some concerns about the forum posts, I also think that you're perhaps taking all this a little too personally.

How am I supposed to take it when the player in question states explicitly: "I play like this. It's all personal." He outright says that it is a personal issue. Not only that but he connects this directly to his in-game play style. That is even more concerning, because it suggests that while this may have begun as an IC dispute, he very likely began "playing" his character in a manner which reflected an out-of-game personal attack. I can understand being heated in an IC argument, but I can't understand playing an ongoing argument as both an IC and OOC dispute, and possibly having this OOC/personal play-style have real in-game effects by his character, whether they are written in an "Letter" msg or an "OOC msg." Perhaps, others see it differently, but I don't understand how I cannot take offense and make this connection when he has been so explicit about it.

I recognize that it can be hard not to under the circumstances, but try to remember that this is a game that you're supposed to enjoy. Winning and losing is part of it. If you're not enjoying it anymore, for any reason, then I highly recommend taking a step back and giving yourself some time to de-stress. Battlemaster shouldn't be a chore...I strongly suggest you evaluate what you can do to make yourself feel better as a player.

I don't feel that *I* should have to be the one to step away from the game because of actions by another player which make this game un-fun for me to play because he broke the Social Contract. (If that is the determination). I should be able to play this game and not have to even worry about such an un-fun experience, let alone consideration of taking a break or quitting.

2. Merlin's player is concerned that I, as a player of Jason, am doing something against him due to what happened inside game. I have to say that I don't even know you and you think I am crazy that I will come to your house shouting that why did you betray me? That will put serious questions on my sanity. I don't make enemies over internet. You have noting to fear.

3. Earlier, I said that it's all personal. If you are hurt by this, then you can tell mods to delete that post. I am sorry ;( If you feel that all my replies are offending, then you may ask the mods to take them down, they have my consent. Do whatever and feel good.

2. I should certainly hope that I would never have to worry about something of that magnitude. But, simply because you aren't crazy enough to actually come find me and harass me in real life doesn't mean that your actions, both in-and-out of the game are not just as real in terms of harassment of me as a player.

3. Deleting a post such as this is meaningless. It is not the content of the post that makes it inappropriate or hurtful, (such as would be the case for lude photos or cus words) but the idea that you are insulting me personally as a player, AND that your in-game actions are personal actions taken to spite me as a player or personally ruin my experience with the game. When you call me a liar, insinuate that I use the forums to spread propaganda and then state things such as me "as the player" having "No honor" it is just abusive.

I consider the play-style which you've demonstrated of connecting in-character actions with the players, and your own actions conceivably being driven in-game by this out-of-game view to be fundamentally harmful to the game. It is also what I believe to be explicitly against the Social Contract. When you take things "personally" and then "play" in the same manner, I can only conceive it as using that in-game influence and power to then attack me as a player. Even when you were successful in stopping Merlin's plans in game, you didn't stop. You continued to berate me through my character in-game, and then brought the same attitude with the same arguments to the forum and continued it some more against me directly. Even when I asked you to not accuse me of lying and that you couldn't possibly know my true intentions in-game you continued.

5. What do you want from me or what do you want to be done with me?

That is neither for me to say or determine. That is up to the Magistrates. But, I do feel that the play-style which you have not only demonstrated, but touted to all of Atamara due to your position to be harmful to the game and me as a player.

[Fury]

I have a character in the realm council of the Cagilan Empire and have knowledge of and participated in the recent IG events. On the case, both complainer and defendant are good players. One tries to make it fun and one takes the game seriously. Nothing wrong with both.

Some background info:

Merlin's intended actions were known to CE's realm council long before he announced it - more than a month ago as the letters are no longer in the database. However, we had asked the PM to keep all those letters safely. As such, resentment was already brewing for some time. The letters that were leaked were accepted as genuine. While we did not have the entire conversation from both sides, what we had was damming enough for the whole council to unanimously agree.

Yet, CE's realm council chose not to act on it. We were likely hoping it would blow away like the rumour of the previous Corian Consul having secret backdoor talks with one of the northern alliances that was leaked when a spy broke news.

So, if Merlin was surprised at how fast and harsh and widespread his Phoenix Empire announcement was met, this was why.

Personally i dont like the way "Jason" plays the game. He "Destroy" opposition with brute force... force them to leave island, force people to secede, give away regions etc.

It was the Taran ruler who insisted that the Eston ruler AND Judge emigrate and the alternative to giving away some regions would be to take them all away and Rielston and Lyonese seceded all on their own.

How am I supposed to take it when the player in question states explicitly: "I play like this. It's all personal." He outright says that it is a personal issue. Not only that but he connects this directly to his in-game play style. That is even more concerning, because it suggests that while this may have begun as an IC dispute, he very likely began "playing" his character in a manner which reflected an out-of-game personal attack. I can understand being heated in an IC argument, but I can't understand playing an ongoing argument as both an IC and OOC dispute, and possibly having this OOC/personal play-style have real in-game effects by his character, whether they are written in an "Letter" msg or an "OOC msg." Perhaps, others see it differently, but I don't understand how I cannot take offense and make this connection when he has been so explicit about it.

I believe it simply means that while some people can come out of the game and make plans to make Atamara "exciting" or "fun" and then go back IG and make it happen, others prefer to stay IG and respond to events IG and do not believe that OOC should drive events. As such, when IG is brought into an OOC forum it can easily be seen as a continuation of an IG dispute particularly when what is said in the forum is as contradictory as what is said IG as how the defendant sees it here: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3740.msg95788.html#msg95788

This is the real reason for the birth of the Phoenix Empire: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3740.msg95795.html#msg95795. Different strokes for different folks. Particularly when it's like the mob. Once you're in you can never leave. http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Phoenix_Empire/Phoenix_Charter#Irrevocability_Clause

The overall sense from CE's side was, Coria was being led mostly unknowingly by most of its subjects into an eventual war with CE + whoever was going to remain with CE instead of joining the Phoenix Empire. Considering that Coria was a colony of CE that CE had saved many times and in turn be saved by Coria, this could not be seen as anything other than a betrayal no matter how it was presented as we all know the eventual outcome.

On the case:

The Magistrate system is:
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,819.0.html

• for resolving in-game disputes
• Any and all in-characters disputes (i.e. between characters) are to be resolved in-game

Anything that spills over into the forums should be brought to the attention of the various Forum Moderators.

IMO:
A simple OOC message IG to clearly define that any 'attacks' are purely IG should clear things up.

[Dante Silverfire]

I have a character in the realm council of the Cagilan Empire and have knowledge of and participated in the recent IG events. On the case, both complainer and defendant are good players. One tries to make it fun and one takes the game seriously. Nothing wrong with both.

Some background info:

Merlin's intended actions were known to CE's realm council long before he announced it - more than a month ago as the letters are no longer in the database. However, we had asked the PM to keep all those letters safely. As such, resentment was already brewing for some time. The letters that were leaked were accepted as genuine. While we did not have the entire conversation from both sides, what we had was damming enough for the whole council to unanimously agree.

*I* as the player have been aware of CE's realm council having full knowledge of my character's letters for the entirety of these past weeks and knew of this before my character even sent his plans live. However, none of this or any of the other "background info" which you have provided is even remotely relevant to this case. This isn't a dispute between my character and Elegant's character, or a dispute between my character and CE, or anything concerning the plans regarding the Phoenix empire. This case is about the violation of the fair play clause of the social contract over the course of both forum posts and in-game messages that may have stemmed from what "began" as an IC conflict.

On the case:

The Magistrate system is:
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,819.0.html

• for resolving in-game disputes
• Any and all in-characters disputes (i.e. between characters) are to be resolved in-game

Anything that spills over into the forums should be brought to the attention of the various Forum Moderators.

IMO:
A simple OOC message IG to clearly define that any 'attacks' are purely IG should clear things up.

I specifically asked for advice on what to do regarding this issue prior to submitting my report by asking a current Magistrate whether it was appropriate for the Magistrates to rule on. Also, your statement is based upon the assumption that this is purely an in-character dispute and this is probably based upon the position your character holds on CE's realm council. You've seen primarily that side of the story at this point.

As such, when IG is brought into an OOC forum it can easily be seen as a continuation of an IG dispute particularly when what is said in the forum is as contradictory as what is said IG as how the defendant sees it here: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3740.msg95788.html#msg95788

Are you saying it is acceptable to take what begins as an in-game dispute to become an out-of-game and player dispute? That seems extremely backwards and something which would be highly discouraged not just by the social contract but general acceptance of what should be done in any sort of game setting.

[^ban^]

I have a character in the realm council of the Cagilan Empire and have knowledge of and participated in the recent IG events. On the case, both complainer and defendant are good players. One tries to make it fun and one takes the game seriously. Nothing wrong with both.

Some background info:
blah blah blah

How is any of this at all relevant to the case? The accusation is that Elegant has moved from engaging in an IC dispute to OOC harassment. Yet, none of your massive wall of text has anything to do with that! Do not derail cases with irrelevant information.

The Magistrate system is:
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,819.0.html

• for resolving in-game disputes
• Any and all in-characters disputes (i.e. between characters) are to be resolved in-game

Anything that spills over into the forums should be brought to the attention of the various Forum Moderators.

Where on earth did you get this load of bull? The job of the moderators is to prevent things from getting out of hand, not to hand out punitive measures. Look at the topic you just linked again. It explicitly says:

You should bring a case forward for actions by other players that violate the Inalienable Rights or break the Social Contract.

This is very clearly a case about Social Contract violations, or do you dispute that?

[Vellos]

Fury,

Please re-read our verdict here:

http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3357.30.html

I post it here for benefit:
"The Magistrates hold that they have jurisdiction in cases arising from the forum, provided that three conditions hold: first, that a connection between a forum account and a user ID exists; second, that forum moderators have already attempted to redress the issue by comment deletion or thread control as necessary; third, that such means have failed to resolve or end the dispute, and it is of such a nature as to arouse general concern or interest."

"In this case, we find that, while Aaron has privately confirmed to the Magistrates details of his accusations and has submitted all information to the Titans, he violated the social contract in making a public accusation of cheating without evidence. We note that he has confessed his error multiple times, and attempted to clarify the issue. He has also attempted to rectify the issue with regards to players who may have been unjustly or injuriously accused, either implicitly or explicitly, of being cheaters. Even so, his accusation was inappropriate. We thus find him guilty, but, given moderator actions which have occurred and his own behavior since the incident, believe a warning to be sufficient, on the expectation that the behavior will not repeat itself."

"Furthermore, the Magistrates wish to offer guidance with regards to discussions of cheating cases on the forum: namely, any case involving the Social Contract, and especially cheating of any kind, which may be ongoing, should not be discussed in any manner outside of the deliberations of the Magistrates or Titans themselves, except insofar as may be necessary for Magistrates or Titans to gather necessary information. If you have accused someone of cheating to the Titans, keep it to yourself. It is especially imprudent and damaging to the community to issue accusations against groups or group labels, which may include entirely innocent or unrelated players. "

---

The three criteria:
1. Yes, clearly we can identify the players without any difficulty
2. This does not appear to have been attempted– however it is unclear whether any attempt by it now could possibly solve the problem
3. As above, even if such actions did occur, as Silverfire has noted, that, to him, does not resolve the hurt, as his allegation is that such forum posts are indicative of an OOC vendetta informing IC actions, rather than that said OOC messages are themselves harassment. The forum posts are evidence, not crime.

In sum, I think we do have jurisdiction.

On the case itself: I assume that if Elegant is too busy to respond here, he is too busy to be continuing the alleged spam/harassment in game. That being the case, I am content to await his defense of himself, which he has stated he will provide soon.

[Fury]

However, none of this or any of the other "background info" which you have provided is even remotely relevant to this case. This isn't a dispute between my character and Elegant's character, or a dispute between my character and CE, or anything concerning the plans regarding the Phoenix empire. This case is about the violation of the fair play clause of the social contract over the course of both forum posts and in-game messages that may have stemmed from what "began" as an IC conflict.

It is relevant as it is assumed that the player of Elegant is doing IC attacks totally on his own - he is not - Elegant as PM of CE speaks for the realm council and the Empire and it is his duty to safeguard the realm. It also provides background on why he may be extreme about it and that the feeling of betrayal by a long-standing ally and former offspring runs deeper than the betrayal by Carelia.

Also, your statement is based upon the assumption that this is purely an in-character dispute and this is probably based upon the position your character holds on CE's realm council. You've seen primarily that side of the story at this point.

My statement that "A simple OOC message IG to clearly define that any 'attacks' are purely IG should clear things up" is simply due to the fact that he is "harrassing" you not only on the forums but also IG? That he cannot differentiate between IC and OOC - yes? Actually, I can see you side definitely. As a player you want to make a difference for the players, shake things up for the players, make things fun for the players, and how dare the player of Elegant not see and appreciate this. I am saying that as far as he can tell and from what he believes the truth is not being told IG or on the forums. That is why he is on the forums to correct it.

Are you saying it is acceptable to take what begins as an in-game dispute to become an out-of-game and player dispute? That seems extremely backwards and something which would be highly discouraged not just by the social contract but general acceptance of what should be done in any sort of game setting.

Not at all but if he believes you're misrepresenting things he may feel compelled to come and correct it, yes?

How is any of this at all relevant to the case? The accusation is that Elegant has moved from engaging in an IC dispute to OOC harassment. Yet, none of your massive wall of text has anything to do with that! Do not derail cases with irrelevant information.

Already explained above. For future, if you are not sure be sure to ask. Then it won't look like you don't know.

Where on earth did you get this load of bull?

Always fun when Ban brings his Bull in. Can I safely ask if this insulting comment is considered harassment or will he start claiming derailment again or maybe even delete my post? Or if the "Magistrates have jurisdiction over the forums" thing come through, maybe I can open a case too?

The job of the moderators is to prevent things from getting out of hand, not to hand out punitive measures. Look at the topic you just linked again. It explicitly says:

This is very clearly a case about Social Contract violations, or do you dispute that?

Have they prevented things from getting out of hand? A warning post maybe? My eyes may have missed it but sure, let's see the link. Sure, it's about a social contract violation. I'm saying the jurisdiction should be only for IG messages and not the forum. The reason will be below.

Fury,

Please re-read our verdict here:
http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3357.30.html

I got it, thanks. Apparently, I had forgotten about it but looking at the backroom thread on it, my stand has been consistent. http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3365.0.html (backroom access needed)

First sentence from the Social Contract:
When playing, you agree to these terms

With the social contract players that have specifically signed, they only agreed to it 'while playing' the game. Is posting in the Forum playing the game? No.

[Geronus]

Aaaaand Fury strikes again...

Two things.

1. No, all that background information is not relevant, as we are largely already aware of it and the precise details are essentially irrelevant to the question of whether an IC dispute has been inappropriately continued OOC. What you're doing is attempting to justify Elegant's actions by re-litigating both the IC and OOC disputes. Allow the defendant to provide his own justifications please. You are not his advocate, and you especially should be careful not to give off any appearance of bias since you are, by your own statements, involved in this from an IC standpoint.

2. Whether or not we have jurisdiction is not for you alone to decide, nor is it something that needs to be hashed out in this thread. You've made your opinion clear, but other Magistrates have theirs. That decision will ultimately be made in the Backroom through the vote. If you feel we have no jurisdiction, feel free to vote accordingly, but I (and others) disagree with you and I for one will not make my decision on that basis.

[Indirik]

Can we please avoid public Magistrate slap-fights?

[Elegant]

I just want to make two quick notes:

1. I have enough time for game in all the time, but for forums, I need extra time which I get in weekends.

2. Jason was against Merlin. But, Charles did not speak against Merlin. Also, either Jason or Charles did not speak against Eragon Silverfire. It may be possible that Charles and Merlin can become friends because Charles and Jason don't like each other much. Therefore, it is not one person against another person in game. It is purely character vs character.

3. Whatever I say in forums may or may not say anything about my characters in game. If the player is hurt by my forum posts, I have already offered the solution to delete posts and even asked what he wants, I don't like what I did in forums.

[Geronus]

3. Earlier, I said that it's all personal. If you are hurt by this, then you can tell mods to delete that post. I am sorry ;( If you feel that all my replies are offending, then you may ask the mods to take them down, they have my consent. Do whatever and feel good.

5. What do you want from me or what do you want to be done with me?

That is neither for me to say or determine. That is up to the Magistrates. But, I do feel that the play-style which you have not only demonstrated, but touted to all of Atamara due to your position to be harmful to the game and me as a player.

2. Jason was against Merlin. But, Charles did not speak against Merlin. Also, either Jason or Charles did not speak against Eragon Silverfire. It may be possible that Charles and Merlin can become friends because Charles and Jason don't like each other much. Therefore, it is not one person against another person in game. It is purely character vs character.

3. Whatever I say in forums may or may not say anything about my characters in game. If the player is hurt by my forum posts, I have already offered the solution to delete posts and even asked what he wants, I don't like what I did in forums.

It appears to me that Elegant is attempting to apologize and make amends. In that case, I think that his question, "What do you want from me or what do you want to be done with me?," is deserving of an answer from Silverfire.

[Fury]

Certainly it is relevant if you are not sure what led to the continuation on the forums and if you are assuming that the player of Elegant is unable to distinguish between IC and OOC. I am providing basis for the vitriolic.

On advocation, having read Elegant's letters I am in a unique position to understand his state of mind and motivations, including the player behind it. I would think this would be valuable contribution. And with the tide of opinion against him, I will definitely balance it up.

As for appearance of bias, as has been generally agreed upon on having a character in the same realm as either party for any case, I will be abstaining from voting for the verdict but not on any general voting for jurisdiction which was never held. Everything I say are not decisions but Points that I make. If they sound like decisions maybe it's because there's truth in them.

[^ban^]

Certainly it is relevant if you are not sure what led to the continuation on the forums and if you are assuming that the player of Elegant is unable to distinguish between IC and OOC. I am providing basis for the vitriolic.

We are assuming nothing of the sort. By Elegant's own admission, there is no difference between OOC and IC motivation for him.

[Dante Silverfire]

It appears to me that Elegant is attempting to apologize and make amends. In that case, I think that his question, "What do you want from me or what do you want to be done with me?," is deserving of an answer from Silverfire.

I want him to recognize the fact that the play style which he has admitted to taking is harmful to the game and/or other players when he comes into conflict with them, and realize that a simple apologize doesn't solve the issues created from that style of play.

While I can understand that he wants to make amends, I don't think such is possible without him realizing that the actions he takes go beyond simply a one-time thing which you can delete by a mod. Through his character, he represents a lot of people and characters in the game. If he represents a play-style which goes against the Social Contract then he is representing such to all of the characters under his leadership as that being okay.

I fundamentally feel that such manner of playing is simply not okay.

So, what I want done is for the Magistrates to rule on whether this personal style of play is indeed against the Social Contract as originally stated in my OP, and then if it is against the Social Contract to make sure that such play doesn't propagate further so that others aren't harmed in the same way I feel I was. What specifically that would entail, I don't know. The Magistrates have all seen many more cases and situations than I and would know better than me how to correct a situation like this under these specific circumstances.

[Geronus]

I want him to recognize the fact that the play style which he has admitted to taking is harmful to the game and/or other players when he comes into conflict with them, and realize that a simple apologize doesn't solve the issues created from that style of play.

While I can understand that he wants to make amends, I don't think such is possible without him realizing that the actions he takes go beyond simply a one-time thing which you can delete by a mod. Through his character, he represents a lot of people and characters in the game. If he represents a play-style which goes against the Social Contract then he is representing such to all of the characters under his leadership as that being okay.

I fundamentally feel that such manner of playing is simply not okay.

So, what I want done is for the Magistrates to rule on whether this personal style of play is indeed against the Social Contract as originally stated in my OP, and then if it is against the Social Contract to make sure that such play doesn't propagate further so that others aren't harmed in the same way I feel I was. What specifically that would entail, I don't know. The Magistrates have all seen many more cases and situations than I and would know better than me how to correct a situation like this under these specific circumstances.

Elegant, what do you think? You seem to regret the forum posts. Feel free to elaborate on what you meant by "This is how I play, it's all personal," since that seems to be the crux of Silverfire's critique.