Author Topic: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed  (Read 16211 times)

fodder

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1977
    • View Profile
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #75: August 20, 2011, 09:22:41 AM »
as long as it's paid upfront promptly. as opposed to delay them enough that they miss the tournament, and/or not paid after they didn't go.

question is what happens if someone took the dole and did something else. like recruit cav instead of archers, etc.
firefox

Indirik

  • Exalted Emperor
  • ******
  • Posts: 10849
  • No pressure, no diamonds.
    • View Profile
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #76: August 20, 2011, 04:10:29 PM »
If at first you don't succeed, don't take up skydiving.

Fury

  • Guest
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #77: August 20, 2011, 05:16:24 PM »

Bedwyr

  • Mighty Duke
  • ****
  • Posts: 1762
  • House Bedwyr
    • View Profile
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #78: August 20, 2011, 08:19:24 PM »
Comma added (this is why you don't edit important documents while sick).
"You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til ya understand who's in ruttin' command here!"

Tom

  • Administrator
  • Exalted Emperor
  • *
  • Posts: 8203
    • View Profile
    • BattleMaster
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #79: August 21, 2011, 09:03:01 PM »
And no - sending a (warning) message is NOT an action.

I take responsibility for that misunderstanding.

This is where I think we should make a difference between threats or other words and actions.

The wording on the IR page was written with actual actions in mind. So if someone was banned, fined, demoted or otherwise has had any in-game action taken against him, then those words should hold true.

But if the guilty party stops and retracts his words before any actions, we should honour their insight and willingness to admit a mistake. So, for example, if someone posts "don't go to that tournament, we need you in the war!" to the realm channel, and someone else points out "hey, that's an IR, you can't stop us!" and the first one follows up saying "oops, my bad. Forget what I said." - I don't think we should punish him. Of course, there are always border cases, like the same guy constantly trying to get away with IR violations and always retracting them when called up, to avoid punishment - those are the grey areas we have the Magistrates for.

Basically, we don't want to punish well-meaning people who made a mistake. A warning would be adequate in those cases, because it serves to clarify that issue.

Tom

  • Administrator
  • Exalted Emperor
  • *
  • Posts: 8203
    • View Profile
    • BattleMaster
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #80: August 21, 2011, 09:07:36 PM »
I respect all that. But nowhere in there is the player forced to do these things- the threats/punishments are on the character. He always has an IC option to defy the order. If that means taking a fine or a ban, great, good for RP. Suck it up and move on with honor or acquiesce and dishonor your family name. But nobody's threatening harm to his account or his honor/prestige/fame or his RL mother.  That's why I don't get what makes them player rights.

Am I just dense here? I don't want to beat a dead horse if I'm the only one stuck on this. Like I said, I respect and support the IRs, simply because it's what you've dictated as best for the game.  And I'll continue to do so.

I understand where you're coming from.

Yes, there is this mix or contradiction there. And yes, it could theoretically all be handled purely IC. However, 10 years of experience have shown that many players, especially the two kinds that we would like to attract more of - newcomers and casual players - simply don't want to put up with all the stress and uncertainty of standing up for their rights in a roleplayed conflict. Therefore, we give them a few IRs that protect the most important gameplay decisions from becoming such matters.

And yes, the punishments are on the character - of course, because you can't reach other players to punish them. But the pressure is on the player, because most players (especially of the two kinds mentioned above) will bow to, rather than stand up to, this kind of pressure.

Tom

  • Administrator
  • Exalted Emperor
  • *
  • Posts: 8203
    • View Profile
    • BattleMaster
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #81: August 21, 2011, 09:10:20 PM »
Fury: You are currently arguing over the basic premise of the Inalienable Rights.  While that may, in theory, be a valid argument, it is 1. Not the purpose of the Magistrates, and I'm getting increasingly leery about having a Magistrate who wants to argue the premise of the IR's,

I am happy to have one. If the rules are not clear or not good, and someone points that out, then we can improve the rules and/or their wording.

Gustav Kuriga

  • Guest
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #82: August 22, 2011, 05:34:42 AM »
Thank you Tom, for clearing that up.

Vellos

  • Honourable King
  • *****
  • Posts: 3736
  • Stodgy Old Man in Training
    • View Profile
Re: Threats of reprimand due to playing speed
« Reply #83: August 27, 2011, 01:23:23 AM »
A verdict has been reached, and IG Magistrate actions have been made. For anyone 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.
"A neutral humanism is either a pedantic artifice or a prologue to the inhuman." - George Steiner