The banning continued

[LoveableNalle]

tc_topcat
Senior Member




Level: 10
Member ID: 2723
HP: 9 / 235
MP: 43 / 588
Exp: 40%
Registered: May 2003
Location: Scotland, U.K
Posts: 129


The banning!!!!
Ok, im possibly meant to post this in kingdoms bit or here im not sure, but i'll get to the point.

Most people know that today nayoko was removed from KJ and Jagen came on to sort it out, this resulting in the banning of two players....Hawk and Zelin.

I've be told that hawk is only banned for one month, but what i would like to say is, there have been other occasions in which leaders have been overthrown and nobody was banned then, so how can the banning of these two members be justified.

I am not saying what they did was right, but the point being there should not be different rules for different people. If rules are to enforced they should be for everyone and not just a select few!!!

This highlights the corruptness of graal


__________________
Captain Misty Di (Pirates)

There was a difference in what happened in the other two kingdoms and what happened in KJ. Both in Dustari and CP the leaders ran from an RP attempt to be overthown. In my case no one even attempted to approach me RP or OOC, they just got together and decided to do it. And in Dustari and CP cases they had many members who agreed with what happened. In KJ only two members decided this should happen and did it. They did it out of thier lust for power not any concern for kingdom, where as in other cases the concern was for thier kingdom.

[Lance]

Hi. Thought I'd speak on this general matter.

A bug was abused in 3/3 cases.

I don't care whose in-kingdom support you have, it's still wrong.

And, kindly don't misrepresent the RP circumstances of the others - If I recall correctly (and, I most certainly do), I was in the middle of an RP when Padren added himself at a higher rank to overthrow me. I had just announced to the kingdom that I would sleep on the demands made of me (I was rather tired, and I needed some rest, so the RPing would continue the next day). But, the others could not wait another day after all of this time I was supposedly inactive.

Regardless, that's not the issue at hand.

I request two things:

1) This stupid bug be removed
2) Since FireFly20 is banned for abusing this bug, ban the rest who did. You can't say a damn word about any of these cases being fair or within the rules.

[WanDaMan]

I think she's right; 2 people get banned, others should too.

[Satrek2000]

As far as I can tell, the other cases aren't quite the alike to this one. I don't want to get into detail now, all I'm saying is that I believe those matters have been settled, and banning people now would rather bring chaos than improvement to GK.

[busyrobot]

Originally posted by Lance
Hi. Thought I'd speak on this general matter.

A bug was abused in 3/3 cases.

I don't care whose in-kingdom support you have, it's still wrong.

And, kindly don't misrepresent the RP circumstances of the others - If I recall correctly (and, I most certainly do), I was in the middle of an RP when Padren added himself at a higher rank to overthrow me. I had just announced to the kingdom that I would sleep on the demands made of me (I was rather tired, and I needed some rest, so the RPing would continue the next day). But, the others could not wait another day after all of this time I was supposedly inactive.

Regardless, that's not the issue at hand.

I request two things:

1) This stupid bug be removed
2) Since FireFly20 is banned for abusing this bug, ban the rest who did. You can't say a damn word about any of these cases being fair or within the rules.

lol

You were 'tired' for the 6 months you refused to play or do anything at all.

There is a such thing as abuse of the K right you know.

I agree the bug should be fixed, but there should be a way for people to rate a ruler, if ruler gets < 10% approval 3 months in a row, then they'd be removed. Then lance would have been out a long long long time beforehand.

[narkotic]

That's a good idea. An ingame feature called 'monarch approval rating' that members of a kingdom would apply towards their leader.

It'd at least be a cool statistic to pop on the website

Also, I disagree with using a bug to remove a kingdom leader. There are obviously other ways to do this, and by resorting to a bug to remove kingdom leaders it's showing impatience and ineffectiveness to create a resolution for the issue.

We can take this bug, and compare it to assassination in a way. By using it, you are taking the leader out in a sense, so it is fitting. Now, by assassinating someone who still has approval over some of their members, you only succeed in making this person a martyr. By convincing a majority of your colleagues against this person, there's quite possibly a way to use force to convince change or force them to step down. Of course, there are those who are too stubborn to realize when they're no longer favored, but I'm sure there's the staff to help out in those situations. Or at least other kingdoms which would become involved at some point as well.

I think from this point on, this bug should be viewed as a bannable offense. A retroactive position on this isn't needed, but if so chosen I wouldn't be against it either.

I agree, this bug needs to be fixed as soon as possible. It's starting to become a big issue, so it'd be great if a resolution for it became a priority. This would be a positive response from the staff for it's supportive customers.

[tc_topcat]

If you wanna start a new thred nayoko would younot drag my name into it...i've said my bit the thred was closed...and as a mod you should know that your not allowed to re-start a thred thats previoulsy been closed

[GoZelda]

Originally posted by tc_topcat
and as a mod you should know that your not allowed to re-start a thred thats previoulsy been closed

Or discuss bans.

[Lance]

Sigh.

I thought I indicated that the ends do not justify the means, that I don't care why a bug was abused, but a bug was abused.

There exists a rule against this.

There exists no rule against inactivity.

These are the two bottom lines for this debate with you, Padren.

And, if you had a problem with my inactivity, you should have consulted Stefan - preferably before abusing the bug; or, even more preferably, without abusing a bug at all. Unfortunately, while you do claim to have spoken with him, it was after-the-fact, and it was in an attempt to justify what you did. Sorry, buddy. The rules don't work like that.

Moderators: Now, as this thread shouldn't have been created in the first place - closure, please?

[--Chris--]

Rping out a king = unorderly and illogical. If GK took RPing that drastically then all RPing fundimentals would be screwed unless a policy is created on exactly how to go about doing things, as it is one does not exist so everything is flexibly flawed and it's stupid to think your actions are just Padren. Have you even considered outside playerwise factors such as Stefan likely having to add debug access for the new leaders often?

"I agree the bug should be fixed, but there should be a way for people to rate a ruler, if ruler gets < 10% approval 3 months in a row, then they'd be removed. Then lance would have been out a long long long time beforehand. "

Yes and there _COULD_ also be a created system from the top of anyone's head even while drunk or beaten senseless (or even both) that can positively benefit them. Woah! - you're such a genious! Also that "rate a ruler" idea is very flawed and can be easily manipulated/abused. Do you really think that out of everybody else on GK you are the best choice for a leader? Your actions certainly have proven against it thus far ;o

Wow...not only why this is unethical briefly explained above but you also see where Lance's point stands legally and actions have been taken against others which have done the same. You shouldn't be an exception. Lance rightfully deserves his kingship back kthz

[Lance]

I don't want my kingdom back, though I agree that I do deserve it.

I merely want the rules to be applied evenly.

Just because someone has debug doth not mean they should be able to circumvent the rules.

[busyrobot]

I agree lance, about closing the thread as it is a dead topic.
As for the ends justifying the means, I have no regrets, no one would argue you had the 'right' to continue abusing your position.
(Okay, you and Chris have both made the case in favor of staying in power abusivily, but then you both share the same trait of chronic inactivity, albiet his with a future goal in mind)

If you want to go on a Retro-Banning campaign against me, do what ever entertains you.

Its a dead topic, and should be closed. You make decent points but they ignore the gross neglagence on your part, you claim that has no factor, I disagree.

So may as well close it, its not like any new middle ground will be reached.


(PS: Try not to post an opening for a debate in the top of a post, and a request to close the thread with your last word at the bottom. You can't bait a thread then ask to close it. Well at least, if you do, its really kinda dumb.)