Proposal for a new BM rule

[Velax]

Lately I've seen more and more people try to claim violations of the IRs where there has very obviously been no violation. Claims that calling for volunteers to change class is a violation. Claims that banning someone for refusing to respond or engage with the realm for two months is a violation. Caims that demanding a ruler step down violates his right to choose a class because the H/P penalty reduces his stats below the required amount. Blatantly ridiculous claims that anyone who's actually read the IRs should know are obviously wrong.

The current rule for threatening to contact the Titans is:

"One important rule is that you either contact the Titans, or you don't. Do not threaten other players with them."

I would like to propose a similar rule for the IRs:

"One important rule is that you either contact the Magistrates about IR violations, or you don't. Do not post accusations in-game or on the forums (except in the Courthouse)."

This would not stop people making their claims if the truly believe there has been a violation, but it will stop these idiocies propagating in-game and exposing new generations of players to false information. It will also encourage the people making these claims to actually read the IRs and so perhaps realise whether or not there has been an actual violation.

[vonGenf]

Lately I've seen more and more people try to claim violations of the IRs where there has very obviously been no violation. Claims that calling for volunteers to change class is a violation. Claims that banning someone for refusing to respond or engage with the realm for two months is a violation. Caims that demanding a ruler step down violates his right to choose a class because the H/P penalty reduces his stats below the required amount. Blatantly ridiculous claims that anyone who's actually read the IRs should know are obviously wrong.

The current rule for threatening to contact the Titans is:

"One important rule is that you either contact the Titans, or you don't. Do not threaten other players with them."

I would like to propose a similar rule for the IRs:

"One important rule is that you either contact the Magistrates about IR violations, or you don't. Do not post accusations in-game or on the forums (except in the Courthouse)."

This would not stop people making their claims if the truly believe there has been a violation, but it will stop these idiocies propagating in-game and exposing new generations of players to false information. It will also encourage the people making these claims to actually read the IRs and so perhaps realise whether or not there has been an actual violation.

The rule for the titans is "Do not threaten to contact the Titans", it is not "Do not point out rules violations".

I have often been exposed to violations of the IR, and the first step is always to point out the rule and explain why it's wrong. Only if a player willfully breaks the rules anyway would I contact the Titans (I only had to do so once, and it was useless anyway).

It's important to be able to talk before escalating everything to the Magistrates. In most cases, people will apologize and not do it again.

[Vellos]

It's important to be able to talk before escalating everything to the Magistrates. In most cases, people will apologize and not do it again.

+1

[Lavigna]

The rule for the titans is "Do not threaten to contact the Titans", it is not "Do not point out rules violations".

I have often been exposed to violations of the IR, and the first step is always to point out the rule and explain why it's wrong. Only if a player willfully breaks the rules anyway would I contact the Titans (I only had to do so once, and it was useless anyway).

It's important to be able to talk before escalating everything to the Magistrates. In most cases, people will apologize and not do it again.

that's a +1 from me as well....in fact in the most recent case...well that was the case.It started by someone trying to point out that the player was abusing in game actions but....oh well the name Titans was brought up and the whole "do not threaten with titans" started.

Do not use the name of the Titans in vain!!! i mean how hard is it people?

[Dante Silverfire]

I have to disagree with the banning of discussion of violations in game as well.

Making threats should not be allowed.

However, pointing out someone's violations should be. In military council discussions before, I've had cases where either myself or others are pushing the line of what the IR's allow. Someone would point it out with a quick OOC message, and we'd immediately drop the issue. Or if someone had some information from some Magistrate case that was relevant they would share it, and no more issues would be had.

This rule would prevent such discussion and just lead to more cases which aren't necessary.

With that said, expanding "Do not threaten to contact the Titans" to be: "Do not threaten to contact the Titans or the Magistrates" would be an acceptable change in my opinion.

[vonGenf]

"Do not threaten to contact the Titans or the Magistrates" would be an acceptable change in my opinion.

Yes, that seems very reasonable.

[Solari]

To Dante's point about discussing potential violations in the game—

What is the point of an adjudicating body like the Magistrates or Titans if not to resolve those very questions? I can envision a scenario in which a potential violation was committed, and through discussion in the realm, an incorrect explanation/defense was given that defused the situation. Why is that a problem? Because it denies someone their only recourse, and it wrongly educates other players about the rules. It's hard enough to convince people of a rule for which everyone seems to understand the basis. It's a nightmare when there's years of misinformation around it.

[Dante Silverfire]

To Dante's point about discussing potential violations in the game—

What is the point of an adjudicating body like the Magistrates or Titans if not to resolve those very questions? I can envision a scenario in which a potential violation was committed, and through discussion in the realm, an incorrect explanation/defense was given that defused the situation. Why is that a problem? Because it denies someone their only recourse, and it wrongly educates other players about the rules. It's hard enough to convince people of a rule for which everyone seems to understand the basis. It's a nightmare when there's years of misinformation around it.

Why does that deny someone their recourse?

If the person either didn't feel that their concerns were heard, they can bring it to the Magistrates. If a person doesn't like an explanation given, they can bring it to the Magistrates.

I can perhaps see an argument for wrongly educating players about the rules, but if there is discussion it does educate players that at least there is a rule that they need to consider with respect to certain actions. Even if wrong explanations are given, open discussion is helpful in my opinion.

Let me use a real in-game example:

While General of Coria, my character proposed that Coria pass a law prohibiting the construction of Cavalry recruitment centers within the realm because they were less effective than infantry, archers, or Special forces in all manner of combat which Coria would ever fight in. Someone brought it up that they believed this was against the IR to allow people to recruit whatever unit they wished. I addressed that concern by referring them with a link to the Courthouse Q/A or case referring specifically to this issue. Namely, that controlling the centers available is allowed, but determining from there is not acceptable.

This was simple and easy, and educated everyone relevant in-game about the determinations already made by the Magistrates/community/Tom. Not everyone reads the forums, or the Magistrate cases. Only the parties involved even get information about them sent directly. If we place the proposed rule into place, we couldn't even have such productive discussions to even allow me to refer people to past cases and discussions as it'd be concerning the Magistrates.

I think if we simply prohibit using the magistrates and titans as a threat, then we cover most bases.

[Solari]

Reasonable and well-argued response. Okay, I'm on board.