I agree. It is most certainly on the wiki. Front page and all. Still, I never knew it existed until I asked here in the forums. Besides, it seems that the definition of a friendly realm merger is much debated.
I guess this is my parental side asserting itself. Before I feel okay with disciplining one of my kids I need to feel that the rules were clear and understood. That there was no reasonable chance that the infraction was due to a misunderstanding. If I find myself wondering if the kid knew better of not, then I simply can not bring myself to discipline. Instead I teach. I do not just teach the child who broke the rules though. I teach all three of the boys and do everything I can to ensure they understand. Next time I will enforce the rule with no qualms. I take this approach with me everywhere. Family, friends and work.
I am not trying to be all high and mighty. I really think all of you guys are doing an amazing job. It was just a point of concern. I may be way off. Thanks and thanks again!
When dealing with people you know, you can afford to be soft. Sometimes people didn't know, and you know they didn't know, and understand that it's reasonable they didn't know.
However, when you get lots of people, you need clear rules. Rules you expect everyone to know. Rules you publish for easy reference. In law, there's the principle of "Ignorantia juris non excusat": ignorance of the law does not excuse.
Because when you get this many people in a system together, and you try to teach, then some people with less honest intent will take advantage of this, because they know they'll be able to get away with breaking the rule. Because if you open up ignorance of the rule as an excuse, then you end up with people using that to justify themselves all of the time, and having the impossible task of proving they did indeed know. Because if we want to be just, we need to apply the same rules to everyone, and apply them in the same way.
