Look, the magistrates aren't about solving arguments. Reading previous cases holds all the answers you want:
Here is a relevant case's verdict. You can read it if you like, its titled "Banned for five days of inactivity"
A verdict has been reached, and no IG enforcement actions were necessary. For anyone who desires to cite this case in the future, the final verdict was:
"The Magistrates find Evi Dimi not guilty of violating the Inalienable Rights. From all appearances, the bans were intended to punish characters for their decisions: namely, their decision to remain in a realm for hundreds of days and repeatedly ignore or disobey orders. While few days of inactivity never merits a ban, prolonged months of insufficient responses to reasonable queries, disobedience of orders, and general uselessness to a realm is certainly sufficient grounds for an entirely IC, non-IR-violating ban. A player's right to inactivity is protected, and its negative effects are controlled for by auto-pausing. But a character's right to blasé disregard for orders is not protected.
Magistrates voted 6-0 in favor of the not guilty verdict."
This thread is now closed.
