And I don't care how toxic you think the League may be, anything said IC should not be taken OOC.
If I can put an IC letterhead on a letter that explicitly is targeted at a player, and have no punishment done to me, then there is a serious problem with this game.
I'd like the other Magistrates to correct me if I'm wrong, but this is NOT how cases are decided. This is NOT 'guilty until proven innocent' justice. That would set a very bad precedent and kick the door wide open for endless frivolous accusations.
This is NOT guilty until proven innocent. What it IS, is actually using the standard that the social contract TELLS YOU to use. If you aren't judging social contract cases in the fair play cause by that standard, then I humbly submit that the Magistrates have been doing it WRONG for a long time.
Everythign in the social contract says that players must err on the side of caution. Not, "walk the borderline." but err on the side of caution. Make it "Clear and Obvious" that no harm is intended.
Stating OOCly that my character is evil, is not erring on the side of caution. Stating oocly, that *I* the person should never be given power in real life is not erring on the side of caution.
Should all members listed be given a punishment? No. But, completely throwing out this case is absurd and would mean the death of the social contract as we know it.
