Difference between revisions of "User:Buffalkill/Jurisprudence"

From BattleMaster Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Justin Licht v. Lyman Stone: Inappropriate Out of Charcter Insults)
Line 43: Line 43:
 
Too many people just sit by quietly in BM (I know, as I am guilty of this in some instances as well), and then complain when their lack of participation is frowned upon. In this case, it sounds like you are actively not participating, and further not allowing others to do the job that you should be doing, and then complaining here when they apply the stick as an attempted second corrective measure.
 
Too many people just sit by quietly in BM (I know, as I am guilty of this in some instances as well), and then complain when their lack of participation is frowned upon. In this case, it sounds like you are actively not participating, and further not allowing others to do the job that you should be doing, and then complaining here when they apply the stick as an attempted second corrective measure.
 
|}
 
|}
 +
  
 
===Decision===
 
===Decision===
Line 50: Line 51:
  
 
The IRs protect OUT OF CHARACTER enjoyment, this is an in-character power struggle that should be resolved through in-character actions.
 
The IRs protect OUT OF CHARACTER enjoyment, this is an in-character power struggle that should be resolved through in-character actions.
 +
|}
 +
 +
==Justin Licht v. Lyman Stone: Inappropriate Out of Charcter Insults==
 +
 +
'''Summary''': Inappropriate Out of Charcter Insults
 +
 +
'''Violation''': No verbal attacks, insults or harassment of other players. E
 +
 +
'''World''': Dwilight
 +
 +
'''Complainer''': Justin Licht
 +
 +
'''About''': Lyman Stone
 +
 +
'''Full Complaint Text''':
 +
Out-of-Character from Hireshmont II Vellos   (just in)
 +
 +
Message sent to everyone in "Sanguis Astroism" (124 recipients)
 +
 +
F--k you.
 +
 +
 +
Lyman Stone
 +
 +
===Arguments===
 +
'''[http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,5437.msg124450.html#msg124450/ Feylonis]'''
 +
{|class="wikitable"
 +
| colspan="1"; text-align:left; font-weight:bold;" | Jonsu (Justin's character) planned with one other person (an Elder in SA) to take over the Church. Jonsu was allowed back in, promoted to Elder, and demoted almost everyone else from Elder in the span of a few hours. Now, with no mechanic in place to oust an Elder, Jonsu basically has full control of SA.
 +
|}
 +
 +
'''[http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,5437.msg124305.html#msg124305/ Anaris]'''
 +
{|class="wikitable"
 +
| colspan="1"; text-align:left; font-weight:bold;" | No matter the provocation, such out-of-character venom is never excusable.
 +
|}
 +
 +
'''[http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,5437.msg124312.html#msg124312/ Vellos]'''
 +
{|class="wikitable"
 +
| colspan="1"; text-align:left; font-weight:bold;" | Worth noting that I've never behaved like this before.
 +
 +
In the previous case where we've had discussion of particularly venomous interactions between players, it's been usually both sides having a long record of negativity and hostility. I have no such record, nor do I think anyone can accuse me of this kind of blow-up before.
 +
 +
I've already paused Hireshmont, who was my last active character. The resolution of this case will probably not meaningfully affect my decision to play or not in the future.
 +
 +
I don't get mad at people for just being antagonizing. Annoying people, people who routinely operate on OOC grudges... I've played BM long enough to deal with that. No problem with that.
 +
 +
It's when apparently two characters, one of whom has been borderline inactive for months and hasn't included any other characters (publicly at least) in his apparently monumental plans, exploit a ridiculous asymmetry of button-power to single-handedly rewrite the whole structure of the largest player-created institution in BM-history. Yes, that ticks me off, because it's OBVIOUS abuse. It's CLEARLY not playing with friends. It's Justin having fun f--king with game mechanics to knock over the sandcastle the other kids have been diligently building for years.
 +
|}
 +
 +
===Decision===
 +
{|class="wikitable"
 +
| colspan="1"; text-align:left; font-weight:bold;" | ''Pending...''
 +
|}

Revision as of 07:05, 6 May 2014

Daniel Richard v. Menelaus: Fined for not giving access to Banker

Summary: Fined for not giving access to Banker

Violation: Inalienable Rights violated

World: Dwilight

Complainant: Daniel Richard

Respondent: Menelaus

Intro

Region Lords have the right to not allow the Banker access to there Regions, How can one be ordered to do so, its the same concept of ordering a noble to recruit certain types of troops to recruit or punishing nobles for attending tournaments.  The fines are for the wrong reasons period. Full text

Arguments

SaDiablo

Same principle as telling a player what to recruit. This is one of the newer features so it wouldn't have mention directly in the IA

But it needs to join the list, has way to many abusive features if concepts of that above is proof.

Poseidon

This is about the players hoarding food and not responding back anyway to those who asked them to sell food.

Morek is a theocracy.. the said players ignored orders from the ruler itself.. dont think any medieval rulers would have accepted that without doing anything. They didnt even give an explanation or speak until now on why they dont want to sell food or open up their granaries.

This complaint seems to be more out of OOC reasons as the player complaining is one who was ridiculed by the ruler for supporting a region lord who allowed his region to starve and got kicked out due to the region loosing control.

Bael

Yes, I really don't see the issue here.

It is a legitimate power struggle between Lords and the Council. If the Lords are looking after their food well, and making sure it gets sold, then they can argue that giving the Banker control is unnecessary. If, however, they are being negligent, and through this negligence the realm suffers, and if they then further refuse to cooperate when the Banker tries to right the situation, then arguably they deserve punishment.

Totally IC power struggle and dynamics. There is no rule that says "you can do whatever you want with your region, this is OOC and protected by IR".

Just like the IR says you can be active as much or little as you want. HOWEVER, higher positions require more commitment, an unspoken agreement when you take them on. This does not mean that you need to log in every day, but you DO need to do the job that your positions requires. And if not, you will, or at least SHOULD be called on it.

And you just got called on it.

Too many people just sit by quietly in BM (I know, as I am guilty of this in some instances as well), and then complain when their lack of participation is frowned upon. In this case, it sounds like you are actively not participating, and further not allowing others to do the job that you should be doing, and then complaining here when they apply the stick as an attempted second corrective measure.


Decision

Tom

Not an IR.

The IRs protect OUT OF CHARACTER enjoyment, this is an in-character power struggle that should be resolved through in-character actions.

Justin Licht v. Lyman Stone: Inappropriate Out of Charcter Insults

Summary: Inappropriate Out of Charcter Insults

Violation: No verbal attacks, insults or harassment of other players. E

World: Dwilight

Complainer: Justin Licht

About: Lyman Stone

Full Complaint Text: Out-of-Character from Hireshmont II Vellos  (just in)

Message sent to everyone in "Sanguis Astroism" (124 recipients)

F--k you.


Lyman Stone

Arguments

Feylonis

Jonsu (Justin's character) planned with one other person (an Elder in SA) to take over the Church. Jonsu was allowed back in, promoted to Elder, and demoted almost everyone else from Elder in the span of a few hours. Now, with no mechanic in place to oust an Elder, Jonsu basically has full control of SA.

Anaris

No matter the provocation, such out-of-character venom is never excusable.

Vellos

Worth noting that I've never behaved like this before.

In the previous case where we've had discussion of particularly venomous interactions between players, it's been usually both sides having a long record of negativity and hostility. I have no such record, nor do I think anyone can accuse me of this kind of blow-up before.

I've already paused Hireshmont, who was my last active character. The resolution of this case will probably not meaningfully affect my decision to play or not in the future.

I don't get mad at people for just being antagonizing. Annoying people, people who routinely operate on OOC grudges... I've played BM long enough to deal with that. No problem with that.

It's when apparently two characters, one of whom has been borderline inactive for months and hasn't included any other characters (publicly at least) in his apparently monumental plans, exploit a ridiculous asymmetry of button-power to single-handedly rewrite the whole structure of the largest player-created institution in BM-history. Yes, that ticks me off, because it's OBVIOUS abuse. It's CLEARLY not playing with friends. It's Justin having fun f--king with game mechanics to knock over the sandcastle the other kids have been diligently building for years.

Decision

Pending...
Retrieved from "https://wiki.battlemaster.org/index.php?title=User:Buffalkill/Jurisprudence&oldid=176642"