More relevant would be
this case.Let me also quote the final verdict.
A verdict has been reached, and IG Magistrate actions have been made. For anybody who desires to cite this case in the future, the final verdict was:
"It is never acceptable to order, request, or suggest the violation of Inalienable Rights. This is especially important about the right to play at your own pace. No player should ever be threatened with punishment because they fail to make daily reports. Moreover, it is especially important to note that it is a violation of inalienable rights even if no punishment is given: sending messages that violate Inalienable Rights is a punishable action.
Given that no punishments were actually handed out, and given that the player of Balewin clearly had no malicious intent, and given that the player of Balewin evidently understands that he overstepped his bounds, the Magistrates will only give a warning this time."
Magistrates voted 8-0 in favor of a warning with no lock as the proper response.
It should be noted that, in addition to demanding that each noble support the takeover on a twice-a-day basis, your character also demanded that reports be included of their work. That's two reports a day, which coincided very well with my example. On a side note, reading previous cases is a
very fascinating experience.
