OOC Harrassment after comments on poor RP

[Vellos]

A verdict has been reached, and IG enforcement actions have been taken. For anyone who desires to cite this case in the future, the final verdict is:

"On the question of jurisdiction, the Magistrates reiterate the opinion expressed in the "Accusations of cheating on the forum" case, which states: "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." The Magistrates further assert that these three criteria hold for essentially any directly BM-related, BM-originating case between BM players which is brought before them. While we do not intend (and lack any ability) to regularly monitor non-Battlemaster means of communications between players, we hold that if an issue is serious enough that the players involved bring it before us, we may rule on it provided we find that there is a compelling interest to do so.

"The Magistrates also assert that as this case is within their jurisdiction and has been brought before them, there is a compelling interest to rule on it, as the nature of the incident is both striking for the degree of hostility evinced and unprecedented as to the involvement of Social Media beyond the confines of the game or forum. Our hope is to set a precedent regarding player to player interactions that may be used as a guide by players moving forward. To put it simply, please be civil in your interactions with other players regardless of the medium. The Social Contract specifies a minimum standard of behavior toward your fellow players. It is our consensus that this standard should not be narrowly applied only to interactions within the game, but be treated as a general guideline for all interactions with other players of the game that concern the game itself.

"The Magistrates find the accused guilty of violating the Social Contract, which states:

"No verbal attacks, insults or harassment of other players. Err on the side of caution, especially if you don't know the other player well."

The message provided as evidence is clearly a verbal attack and insult. It is also highly venomous in nature, to a degree that is both striking and unusual when it comes to interactions between players. It is the consensus of the Magistrates that there is no place for such attacks in the Battlemaster community. Any provocation that could reasonably justify such a hostile response is likely to be itself a violation of the Social Contract and should be brought before us if the players involved cannot settle their differences in a civil fashion. Ultimately, one of the primary functions of both the Social Contract and the Magistrates is to promote a friendly atmosphere in the game and set minimum standards of behavior for the community to follow. We would therefore be remiss if we did not state clearly and unequivocally that vicious personal attacks directed at other players are not acceptable behavior. As this appears to be a one-time incident, the accused will be given a warning, and it is our hope that he will more carefully consider how he interacts with other players in the future."

Magistrates voted 5-1-1 (with Lavigna abstaining) for a guilty verdict with a warning.

This thread will remain open for any questions regarding the case.

[Woelfy]

Although when I was called a douchebag, in game, i was the one reprimanded....i have brought forward evidence of being continuously harassed in the past, and not a single thing was done then, or now.

This will be my last visit to the forum, or to have anything to do with the bm public at large. If I do receive further harassment, I shall report it, but I will not hold my breath that anything will actually be done on my behalf. I will likely deal with it in my own fashion, which is apparently: quite venomous.

Gratitude for showing me the clear breaks in this 'justice' system. Do not expect to hear much from me in the future, unless it is on Beluaterra.

[Vellos]

Although when I was called a douchebag, in game, i was the one reprimanded....i have brought forward evidence of being continuously harassed in the past, and not a single thing was done then, or now.

This will be my last visit to the forum, or to have anything to do with the bm public at large. If I do receive further harassment, I shall report it, but I will not hold my breath that anything will actually be done on my behalf. I will likely deal with it in my own fashion, which is apparently: quite venomous.

Gratitude for showing me the clear breaks in this 'justice' system. Do not expect to hear much from me in the future, unless it is on Beluaterra.

It's unfortunate you choose to receive the verdict that way.

Please do report any further harassment.

[egamma]

Although when I was called a douchebag, in game, i was the one reprimanded....i have brought forward evidence of being continuously harassed in the past, and not a single thing was done then, or now.

You have not brought forth a single piece of evidence since 4/29, when this case opened.

[Geronus]

Although when I was called a douchebag, in game, i was the one reprimanded....i have brought forward evidence of being continuously harassed in the past, and not a single thing was done then, or now.

This will be my last visit to the forum, or to have anything to do with the bm public at large. If I do receive further harassment, I shall report it, but I will not hold my breath that anything will actually be done on my behalf. I will likely deal with it in my own fashion, which is apparently: quite venomous.

Gratitude for showing me the clear breaks in this 'justice' system. Do not expect to hear much from me in the future, unless it is on Beluaterra.

Please do not retaliate in kind. It's counterproductive and will not help your case.

[Lavigna]

This case is so weird to me.

I abstained from the voting thus i can also state my mind openly after the closure of this case.

Infact i believe there is a loop hole in one of the most important cases we are called to decide upon and this is ooc harass.
I ask for both this case and the previous one including Kyle an appeal.
I find both cases a blur upon which we decided to rule lightly and poorly.

I cannot believe how you feel good about these rulings?

A person that so far complained of being harassed got reprimed and now someone else accuses him for harass and he gets reprimed yet again.

Now this is justice.

If with an error of ours we risk to make a player quit the game, then we are doing our job wrong.

[Indirik]

I don't disagree with you Lavigna. I understand that there may have been harassment against Kyle. But what can be done? While I trust you and Anaris completely, where is the evidence of who harassed him? Who did it? Where are the messages? Everyone involved has either refused to provide any evidence, said that they have no evidence to give, and refused to name any names. The Magistrates asked many times for evidence to support harassment claims against Kyle, none was provided.

[Penchant]

I don't disagree with you Lavigna. I understand that there may have been harassment against Kyle. But what can be done? While I trust you and Anaris completely, where is the evidence of who harassed him? Who did it? Where are the messages? Everyone involved has either refused to provide any evidence, said that they have no evidence to give, and refused to name any names. The Magistrates asked many times for evidence to support harassment claims against Kyle, none was provided.

That makes no sense. We know there is a problem, but we can't find evidence so we will just act like it is not happening. Some of you have very strange views on justice, IMO.

[Anaris]

That makes no sense. We know there is a problem, but we can't find evidence so we will just act like it is not happening. Some of you have very strange views on justice, IMO.

Unfortunately, at this point, I can't really fault the Magistrates very much.

Woelfy has certainly been wronged: of this I have no doubt.

However, he has also taken actions which were sure to produce the worst possible reactions from the Magistrates, and then refused to give the Magistrates an opportunity to correct their own mistakes, even when invited and encouraged to do so, simply because he had one bad experience with them before.

[egamma]

That makes no sense. We know there is a problem, but we can't find evidence so we will just act like it is not happening. Some of you have very strange views on justice, IMO.

Knowing that "something" is happening, and knowing "exactly" what is happening, are not the same thing. How would you feel if the police threw you in jail for three days, simply because they "knew you were up to no good"? The Magistrates are basically a jury, and they can only rule based on the evidence they have. Otherwise, it's just a tyranny of opinion. That's not justice.

[Geronus]

That makes no sense. We know there is a problem, but we can't find evidence so we will just act like it is not happening. Some of you have very strange views on justice, IMO.

Would you blame the police for not doing anything about you being mugged if you never called them to report what happened?

[Penchant]

Would you blame the police for not doing anything about you being mugged if you never called them to report what happened?

Knowing that "something" is happening, and knowing "exactly" what is happening, are not the same thing. How would you feel if the police threw you in jail for three days, simply because they "knew you were up to no good"? The Magistrates are basically a jury, and they can only rule based on the evidence they have. Otherwise, it's just a tyranny of opinion. That's not justice.

Both of these are not analogies that fit to this. This a judge convicting you of assault even though they know it was self-defense according to several witnesses with the judge's response being simply, "You didn't give us evidence on precisely how and who all attacked you so we will ignore the fact altogether."

[Vellos]

Both of these are not analogies that fit to this. This a judge convicting you of assault even though they know it was self-defense according to several witnesses with the judge's response being simply, "You didn't give us evidence on precisely how and who all attacked you so we will ignore the fact altogether."

No, we don't know it was "self-defense." We would only know that if there was evidence of that. But there isn't. There is abundant evidence that lots of people think it was self-defense: there is not abundant evidence that it was self-defense. There's a huge difference.

Furthermore, the social contract does not afford players anything like a right to self defense. You bring your problems to the magistrates, or resolve them quietly and peaceably.

[Lavigna]

I asked an appeal on two cases.

How come no one wants to judge upon the first case where Kyle was the complainer?
I asked the case to be re-opened  because i believe there was poor judgement. If Magistrates should decide exclusively upon evidence then anyone can do their job and we should turn this to an open vote.You are also asked to think, judge on your own , see behind evidence and find motives.

You are so focused to the surface that you fail to see everything beneath it.

If you want to actually contribute do re-read both cases and then ask yourselves how evidence worked on both cases.

Also i want the complainer against Kyle to explain what did he mean when he said the following:

"Karel Scherpereel
Holy !@#$, what's with the defensive attitude all the time. Give it a rest. Or QQ"

You said you didn't know who Woelfy is yet here you re asking him what's up with the defensive attitude - all the time- . All the time?

There is a blur here. And also you clearly see that someone is frustrated, you answer with QQ and then you repeat QQ.

QQ is a form of mockery.Sometimes such mockeries are worse than a vulgar insult.

As for the Magistrates :
You had evidence in the first case and you chose to ignore it while at your second decision you demand evidence in order to judge differently.That seems a little odd to me and wakes up a lot of questions.

Either you actually make it your goal to find the rest of those that should be punished for this case or you deal both parties equally.

The job of a Magistrate is to judge, not just punish blindly.

[Indirik]

Either you actually make it your goal to find the rest of those that should be punished for this case or you deal both parties equally.

The Magistrates tried to find out who the other party was, but no one spoke up, provided messages, or named names. So what were they supposed to do?

I asked an appeal on two cases.

How come no one wants to judge upon the first case where Kyle was the complainer?

Why was that first case never finished? I went back and looked, and can't see any reason why it wasn't. I mean, everyone involved was being a total ass, but that's no reason not to follow through and make a ruling. It would be pointless now, as the Ilyrians family that the case was filed against was locked quite some time ago.