JohnnydaHo

Admins have stated time and time again that they do not want petty reports. IMO this kind of report is about as petty as it gets with absolutely no loss. It comes across as ruleplaying rather than roleplaying.

In a recent decision a player was given a Fear RP punishment for talking over the radio while being arrested. this should not be an OOC rule break for fear RP when in actuality there is no reason IC to fear for ones life over such a trivial act and police officers are not going to shoot for it. IMO this type of rule application is based on a "need to win" mentality as far as getting access to crim freqs by police. I do not see why, provided a clear and timely demand from the police is given, that a charge of fail to comply wouldn't suffice in such a situation.

Yup…good thing I like yoga

The biggest complaint against the private labs was people making cash alone in a lab with no rp. It is valid to compare the legal and crim sides on this. Store/gas station owners do not even need to be in the city and they are making cash. I have seen LEO's parked and tabbed out for extended periods....still making cash. So lets be honest and admit that the actual basis for this is the desire to solidify the server as a PVP server where gangs are in multiple shootouts per day

The idea that the drug business is simply sitting in a house making money without any RP is nonsense. To just get in to a position to have a lab an enormous amount of RP and cash is invested. RP is involved when getting ingredients, particularly plants, as the labs serve as a means of making connections and even recruiting. I can guarantee you that there is far more RP involved in cooking 250 coke than there is in arranging to have a gas station or store restocked and then go to bed while the money comes in. Private labs are essential to maintaining turfs which in turn affects shipment weight availability. The whole illegal import system is intricately related to the drug business and trying to force factions into public labs will only lead to shootouts and an inability to maintain their turfs to facilitate shipments.

That is not what the new rule says. It does not matter how clear your demands you just can’t start shooting someone for failing to comply with your demands. It is not an either or situation……you always need sufficient escalation and once you have that it is okay to shoot regardless of demands. There have been a ton of rulings over the past year saying this.

So after over a year operating under the rule change that demands are NOT necessary to grant DM rights, the latest ruling in a report made by Alex Sainz now tells us that it is extremely important that demands be given before shots are fired. I suspect that this is just a case where the moderator who handled the report needs more training to catch up with the rule change that was made over a year ago however I have to ask….does this ruling signal a teversal back to the old days requiring demands?

th

I was told by a PD officer last night that demerits do not drop off and stay on your record until you get three and your license is suspended. Change the system so that demerits drop off your record after a reasonable period of being ticket free.

Can someone explain why we can’t rp placing a crate on the in the back seat or passenger seat anymore?

The report filed by JafaJosh and the result just causes confusion. the guy was on his bike and was approached by a player assuring him that he is not a threat. While other dragons were present, Nobody produced weapons and nobody made threatening comments until the reported party pretended he was going to smoke some dragons and then turned the gun on the guy on the bike telling him to get off. The guy on the bike drove off. There was no escalation whatsoever and got shot in the back. How the fact that the guy stayed to conversate with the reported party but was cautious nullifies the need for actual escalation makes no sense and leaves me clueless as to how to play within the DM rules.

Harveyyy all I said was that I rolled through Sealabs without stopping and they came in behind. As I was leaving someone yelled from behind "get off the bike". No weapons were drawn. Being an avid Harley rider I know that yelling at a guy on a harley who is going by you at 60mph is fruitless and virtually NRP. So too is being in a car hundreds of feet behind going down a highway at 140mph and yelling demands at a a rider in front is also ridiculous and imo NRP. I did not "know" what their ultimate goal was...I assumed. I would have agreed with the ruling hands down if they had actually seen me engage with the area or even just being off my bike in the area. But in this case they knew I had not. I interpreted the rule giving the words their plain meaning and was not attempting to rule play but just rp Fear RP. The point in these circumstances the way it was ruled was that I was simply in a high crime area, had someone yell get off the bike as I was leaving and that's it. imo your interpretation of "engaging in criminal activity" makes no sense to me as it guts the NCZ rule the way it is written, and I do say that respectfully. To analogize, applying the exact same logic to the same set of facts except just changing the location, If I were to leave our clubhouse in Sandy to ride to the Sandy medical to pick someone up and someone drives by me on the way and yells "get off the bike", I would now be in breach of the rule to continue on to the NCZ. When I was in the middle of rping a cardiac event and was laying on the ground going in and out of consciousness in front of a very public store (non NCZ) you intervened again but this time you actually coached the other player that he could now loot me, applauded his fake use of a BLS kit, and then you chased away a police officer who drove up and stopped seeing me there on the ground as I asked him for help. Ultimately this involvement assisted and assured that the player would get my belongings and bike. Admin tells us that knowing the rules is our responsibility but when one can not trust that a rule will be interpreted in a manner consistent with its plain wording that becomes difficult. all of this is of course said and meant with big love for eclipse and I do really appreciate the time you put in to the community.

Posted 11 hours ago "If you have given a gang reasonable suspicion to think that you have witnessed them performing illegal activities you have engaged in criminal RP. This is why certain areas are labeled as "high crime areas". If you do not want to participate then steer clear. Once a gang has reasonable suspicion to think you have witnessed them doing something illegal, are trying to chop a stolen vehicle or are trying to sell drugs you are no longer protected by the NCZ rule." Why do you feel the need to edit the actual rule into something that does not exist? The rule does not rely on the mindset of the aggressive gang but rather on the actual activity of the person whom they are pursuing. Moreover, in this particular case the pursuers came in behind and saw me roll around without stopping and leave. The lab was theirs if they wanted it. I did not witness them engaging in criminal activity either.

it should be against the rules; these rules are made so that civilians and regular players are not hunted excessively by gangs. If you are a gang with an HQ, you should not be hiding in NCZs from other gangs. Well the issue is simply playing by the rules which I do. And rules should make sense. People have chosen to live in a crime infested city so there would be no logic in having NCZ for some and not others in the first place. Plus, try asking a gang member if they are in a gang....9/10 you get no I am just a random...and suddenly a whole gang swoops in on you. If the issue is quality of RP wrt gangs hunting players excessively, the RP for civilians or a club member (Lost is NOT a gang), is the same. Currently there is one particular City gang that comes out to the country in a pack to hunt for single members and for months it has been just the same old rp. it lasts a few minutes and it goes like this: Hands up pussy, on your knees retard, pussy bitch pussy bitch retard /friskrequest pussy bitch retard /shavehead pussy retard" and that's about it. It has become virtually impossible to be in the city without having that RP forced upon you or having them pulling up behind you and following you making the rp that you were doing impossible. So if the NCZ are created to stop the continual hunting, which only leads to the point where people will just get bored or turned off to the point of wanting to leave the server all together, then there is no need for a distinction.

Exactly. I mean on this admins logic it is against the rules for me to drive from our HQ at motel to the Sandy MD ATM, which is surrounded by a chop, money launderers etc.

The rules say nothing of the state of knowledge of the attacker. The first rule says that if you are being attacked and go to an NCZ the attacker must wait until you leave. There is nothing unfair about it as its provided right in the rules. When informed that I was not engaged in criminal activity at the time, the other player is free to question that and bring in an admin. The admin could then review to verify as opposed to twisting the rule so that the plain meaning is not destroyed in the process.

The rule states: If a player uses the NCZ for protection the attacker must wait for that player to leave the area. Players may not go to a NCZ within 15 minutes after engaging in criminal activity or a resulting chase, unless they are turning themselves in to law enforcement. Today I drove through a high crime area and as I was leaving a bike and car who were heading into the area also turned around and started following me yelling "get off the bike". No weapons were ever brandished or pointed at me. I had no interaction with these players before this. I rode to Sandy MD where I got off the bike and was going to talk to the people following me. it is there that admin got involved and ruled that the mere act of driving through a high crime area triggers the application of this rule. I tried the best I could to explain my literal interpretation of the rule and that I had not "engaged" in any criminal activity in the first place that would warrant triggering the rule. I tried to explain that if I followed this rule as written I could go to the NCZ to turn myself in for the criminal activity that gave rise to them chasing me, but the obvious problem is that it is not a crime to just drive through a crime zone so there was nothing that, if I had wanted to, I could turn myself in for. I had nothing illegal on me when this was going down. With respect, the ruling seems non sensical to me and it turns the words "engaging in criminal activity" on its head to the point that you actually do not have to engage in any activity other than drive through a crime area, something which you can't even be arrested or charged for. After all these are still public roads. To add insult to injury after riding to the city and back and circling around our HQ hoping to run into a brother (I was not strapped) I ended up stopping in front of the Sandy 24/7 where I rp'd having a heart attack. I fell to the ground and was going in and out of consciousness. The admin got involved again and interfered with that rp. A police officer drove up and I asked for help as the guy was faking giving me bls and was going to just leave me there after looting me and taking my bike. The admin ignored the RP of me going in and out of consciousness and told the police officer to leave thus enabling the theft in a very public place. While I appreciate that I was not given any punishment or warning for the situation (hence no appeal) I felt I had to express my dismay at an interpretation and application of a rule in manner that is, on its face, inconsistent with the actual wording of the rule. On a more positive note I did really appreciate the admin allowing me to use VOIP during our interaction after explaining that as a disabled senior with painful dexterity issues my typing can be slow and often make mistakes as I try not to slow down the RP. (sometimes it takes me several attempt to type in the scripted commands) For that matter I really do appreciate all of the players who have got to know me and show me the patience and understanding when that happens.

Hope you are having an epic day! I recall seeing the first report that changed the stance on the demands requirement last year. I brought it to the attention of my faction. The new approach focuses, rightly imo, on proper escalation, which can occur in the complete absence of valid demands. Nonetheless, many still shout out "give demands" even where none are required given the IC escalation to that point. The comment from the first ruling adds confusion as the author suggests that the case be used for educational purposes but then goes on to say the old rule..."ensure that you provide valid demands before shooting". Just seems like you guys are on two different pages on this one with contradictory "educational" messaging.

1. In this report, the rules broken were: Deathmatching is the act of attacking a player without a proper IC motive and interaction... A lot can be learnt from this report to enhance future roleplay. To start with, ensure that you provide valid demands before shooting. 2. We would like to also remind everyone involved that demands do not grant you deathmatching rights, nor are they required to have to obtain deathmatching rights

I did not say that. I said up until the getaway, it is the same because the robber does not know what the response will be. Also, your description of a bank robbery is just one example of a way to rob a bank. You do not need a hostage to rob a bank and IRl most robberies are committed without a hostage and the robbers plan to be gone before the cops get there.

The RP experience is just as intense and immersive right up until the getaway whether or not cops show up as the robbers do not know how many cops will respond. After the getaway The RP does not stop there and risks exist beyond that of law enforcement in getting the take safe.. in terms of the whole RP scene of a bank robbery, cops have a very short role. I do not see cops complaining about the free money they are getting sitting 8 deep on one stopped motorcycle for 20 minutes while they try to determine whether the rider was involved in a bank robbery that involved bikes. The long cool time period is enough to limit the amount of cash and I doubt if cops get paid less when banks are on cool down.