Summary: | Banned for being inactive for 5 Days |
Violation: | Ativity |
World: | East Continent |
Complainer: | Joseph Lant (http://battlemaster.org/UserDetails.php?ID=30651) |
About: | Evi Dimi (http://battlemaster.org/UserDetails.php?ID=28979) |
In Perdan a number of characters have been mass banned, myself included, simply for not responding to activity requests half of which time was over the Weekend. That is less than half a week's turn around for responding to a query about activity, which surely shouldn't be being asked anyway.
It's not like this was a multi-stage action, starting with a Fine or a revocation of an Estate or such, it was an outright Ban over a very short period of time given for response. (The Game only takes players expected to be active (Govt. Members) out after 6 full days, So I'd consider a Week a minimum fair response time for an ordinary player who might be going through a period of inactivity. In my case, I was balls deep in University Exams and travelling over the weekend.)
Caeranor Saegarus Griffirtaen 194 days silent, Partora, 0 troops
Hyzenthflay Ahrairah, 204 days silent, Perdan, 0 troops
Thade Leonidas, 125 days silent, Castle Ubent, 0 troops
To explain, I was General before Saul. I had also asked for bans on them, but we waited many time sude to inactivity poissibility.
However, all three of them have had gold cashed on them, I used the Secret Police on two of them once I got King.
Thus, they had also read my orders over the last 100 days and should have recruited when they were told to numerous times.
The ban is fully justified, because the action that broke the law was long before the inactivity conducted. In all three cases.
How exactly did you determine that they hadn't said anything for 194 days? That's going through a lot of effort to pin a "they don't contribute" label on someone.
I too am curious about this.
Did you consider simply cutting their revenue source?
These charcaters never did *anything* to follow the realm hierarchy or say it this way, the players never did anything to play with us.
what good reason is there not to ban them?
Because you should play as you would play a board game with friends. When I play cards and someone cannot follow the game because they're busy with their kids, then I just play without them. I don't kick them out of the room and shut the door.
Because you should play as you would play a board game with friends. When I play cards and someone cannot follow the game because they're busy with their kids, then I just play without them. I don't kick them out of the room and shut the door.
This is not how a realm works.
I'm not really a Duke. I just play one on the internet.
Or they could be logging in 4 times a turn sending loads of private messages back and forth to their co-conspirators, planning a rebellion. They are, after all, hoarding gold in the capital while everyone else goes off to war.
I don't oppose banning in general. I don't even oppose banning for spurious reasons. I oppose witch-hunts to get rid of inactive characters.
But that's not what was said. They were banned for failing to answer letters.
You can ban people for not following orders, but a reasonable effort should be made to be certain that it's not for activity-related reasons.
I really don't know what more you want people to do before banning characters like this.
I really don't know why people would want to ban characters like this. Maybe there was a time when, due to the tax system, they took money from other people, but that time is long gone. The game is pretty well designed so that they don't matter at all and can be safely ignored.
Tom, you have, at multiple times in the past, said that it is acceptable to ban characters who log in, but fail to follow orders.
You don't have to take away their estates first.
I'm not really a Duke. I just play one on the internet.
I really don't know why people would want to ban characters like this. Maybe there was a time when, due to the tax system, they took money from other people, but that time is long gone. The game is pretty well designed so that they don't matter at all and can be safely ignored.
This is somethng in which we agree and i won't deny i did not think of it.
But before i say anything more i want evidence my self from the player who reported me that he was actually working inside the realm and that he answered (even once) explaining his behaviour.
If i had to make the devil's advocate on my self i would even say that one can actually be limited even in messages he receives in order to not become a threat to the realm "spy-talking" but even then what is the point of keeping such a soldier in a realm?
I do not see why he has time to visit the bank but not the recruitment centers for example.He has time to actually walk through the city but not time to answer to his superiors and let them know he has issues that keep him from attending to realm matters.
Anyway, personaly as a Magistrate i can't come to a verdict on my self but i am 50/50 here till i see evidence from the other side proving me wrong , other than "i was inactive for 5 days" , yous tart a case , you better prove it. I said my reasons and i am ready to face their consequences whichever those are.
I really don't know why people would want to ban characters like this.
This is why I asked.
They were clearly active and doing stuff. They were not banned for not doing anything, they were banned for misbehaviour. The IR does not give you the right to act in any way you like without consequences. Its intention is clearly explained - to make sure that OOC takes priority and nobody feels forced to log in if real life is more imporant.
If someone is active, you can ban them for the way they act. Not following orders is a perfectly acceptable ban reason, provided you've made sure that they could have, i.e. it's not just inactivity.
I think the IR is clear in that it refers to OOC activity, not IC activity. Your character does not have a right to be inactive. That's a right of the player, not the character.
Note that just logging in is not enough to establish someone is active in an OOC sense - we've stuff like the quick play link for a reason. That someone logged in yesterday only tells you they had enough time to click two links. But for any periods of reasonable length, you can assume that they had ample opportunity.
And last not least, playing with friends cuts both ways. If you get an important phone call during a board game, you tell the others to wait or go on without you, depending on how long you'll expect it to last.
Wow, that's a lot of words for a few simple facts.
tl;dr: The IR refers to OOC inactivity. If the players are clearly active, then an IC ban based on what their characters do or fail to do is perfectly acceptable.
I do not see why he has time to visit the bank but not the recruitment centers for example.You do realize that everyone gets their taxes in gold, so long as they are in the realm, right?
You do realize that everyone gets their taxes in gold, so long as they are in the realm, right?
You do realize that everyone gets their taxes in gold, so long as they are in the realm, right?
The problem with revoking the estates is that there is nothing to prevent them from snatching the estate right back up
Why are we even discussing this for so many days? The guy who made the report didn't even bother to reply to anything or provide any proof.
Why are we even discussing this for so many days? The guy who made the report didn't even bother to reply to anything or provide any proof.
Activity on the forum should not be a factor in the magistrates' decision either.
+1
It should. If someone doesn't back his case, and the case is not slam-dunk out of itself, then it should be dropped. Why? Because it can't be all that important.
Tom, your first reply, sent 13 minutes after the case was posted, was that this was a slam-dunk case.
Basically, I was saying that murder is illegal, not that O.J. is guilty.
Not a question, but a statement:
We had the same problem with one of those players (who just auto-paused before I got the chance to become Judge) in Outer Tilog, along with a number of others who I did ban for this very reason. I think there is more going on behind the scenes with these guys than simply sitting on gold. In OT we have elections for positions and, almost without fail, when one of them ran they won by a heavy margin without actively campaigning and those who became lords they flocked to and took estates in their regions. In another case one was banned for months, sat as a rogue, and the same day their elected Judge lifted the ban he rejoined the realm. It might be a very good idea to check out these guys and make sure there isn't something more going on than simply sitting around doing nothing.
That's basically an accusation of multi-cheating. Magistrates are not equipped to handle the needed investigation. I suggest you gather up family names and use the old titan reporting system, or send an email to Tom.I disagree, that was a statement of strange behavior that seems like it might need some looking into.
Okay, accusation's not really the right word. However, I don't think I'm alone in reaching that conclusion.Evidence implying something needs to looked into is not the same thing as an accusation and I was thinking clanning myself actually when I read it. (Not an accusation just a statement of my thoughts)
However, as an aside, in the argument earlier it was brought up what harm these characters could possibly do, sitting as they were in the capital doing nothing of note. Well, they can vote in elections.
Not a question, but a statement:
We had the same problem with one of those players (who just auto-paused before I got the chance to become Judge) in Outer Tilog, along with a number of others who I did ban for this very reason. I think there is more going on behind the scenes with these guys than simply sitting on gold. In OT we have elections for positions and, almost without fail, when one of them ran they won by a heavy margin without actively campaigning and those who became lords they flocked to and took estates in their regions. In another case one was banned for months, sat as a rogue, and the same day their elected Judge lifted the ban he rejoined the realm. It might be a very good idea to check out these guys and make sure there isn't something more going on than simply sitting around doing nothing.
I was wondering why those names were familiar!
I too wish you and your realm the best of luck if it is them. They are the example as to why clans can be very harmful to the game.
The one who brought this case is the same player who deleted his character to get around the deportation and caused several of the cases related to that incident here, IIRC. I thought I recognized some connection between those involved in my situation and the places and some of the family names involved in the latter case, which makes me glad that I mentioned it.
As for me and my realm, their Judge failed to run this election, which allowed me to take his spot on the council and level several bans against the group with the idea of cutting the problem out of the realm as much as I can (still can't get rid of their Duke, as he controls our capital, but I've got all the other ones involved). they have been oddly quiet while this has been going on (last time one of them got banned they tried to mass protest the Judge).
Sounds like one faction of nobles attempting to oust an opposing faction. Nothing ooc about that.
Sounds like another saxon witch hunt to me.
Sounds like another saxon witch hunt to me.
If that behaviour is a signature of the Saxons, that's more proof than anything that they're a clan that's bad for the game.It most certainly is. Along with a 100% movement rate when it is something they want and a 0% when it is not.
See above, re: "silently taking over the realm".
Sounds like another saxon witch hunt to me.Sounds like someone can't understand that if there is something suggesting exclusive clanning it should be investigated before it becomes a huge problem.