How Would you feel if...?

[agentxyz2]

How would you feel if...You were banned and assets reset, For something isn't stated in the rules? 

Should the Eclipse team be responsible for clearly noting offenses that could lead one to get banned in the server?

They currently have this power, but with great power comes great responsibility. I suggest - They clarify any rules that they have "protocols to ban for" and waive banning power unless a specific rule is broken. 

They have the power to do as they see fit, but as Eclipse Citizens do we  not have the right to transparency not tyranny. 

This isn't about me personally, I don't really want to push the topic to myself. Just give your honest opinions and (+-)1 if you think the Eclipse team should not ban for offenses not stated in the Server Rules. 

[ThePro]

Tell me, what will you get if we share our ideas? It's obvious that they will do whatever they want, and they don't care even a little about what we think.

[agentxyz2]

Just now, ThePro said:

Tell me, what will you get if we share our ideas? It's obvious that they will do whatever they want, and they don't care even a little about what we think.

I appreciate the cynical, reasonable, and pragmatic response cause it is a bleak situation. But it would really go along way if you + or -1 the post with your honest opinions of being banned if its not stated in the rules. Just your opinion. @ThePro. Thanks for the getting the ball rolling. 

[Swifty]

22 minutes ago, agentxyz2 said:

How would you feel if...You were banned and assets reset, For something isn't stated in the rules?

There's certainly some clarification that could be added into the rules about it (this thread is clearly aimed at discussing your recent punishment) but I'd have thought it'd have been common sense not to attempt to avoid the AFK timer while not playing.

 

If you feel like you'll be away from your screen for an extended period of time, you really should be closing the game down.

[ThePro]

1 minute ago, Swifty said:

There's certainly some clarification that could be added into the rules about it (this thread is clearly aimed at discussing your recent punishment) but I'd have thought it'd have been common sense not to attempt to avoid the AFK timer while not playing.

 

If you feel like you'll be away from your screen for an extended period of time, you really should be closing the game down.

Oh, wait. If that's what got him banned, then this is actually really stupid.

[agentxyz2]

7 minutes ago, Swifty said:

There's certainly some clarification that could be added into the rules about it (this thread is clearly aimed at discussing your recent punishment) but I'd have thought it'd have been common sense not to attempt to avoid the AFK timer while not playing.

 

If you feel like you'll be away from your screen for an extended period of time, you really should be closing the game down.

you are correct, I did get banned (but has since been lifted as I didn't have bad intentions) and I really didn't want to place the emphasis of this post on myself because its the principle thats important. 

 

It was stated to me that "There are protocols that we ban for". Forget my personal experience, how you guys feel about being able to be banned about things not stated in the rules. Thanks for answering Swifty. @ThePro if your done replying thats fine but your opinion on the topic would be nice. 

 

 

[ThePro]

12 minutes ago, agentxyz2 said:

you are correct, I did get banned (but has since been lifted as I didn't have bad intentions) and I really didn't want to place the emphasis of this post on myself because its the principle thats important. 

 

It was stated to me that "There are protocols that we ban for". Forget my personal experience, how you guys feel about being able to be banned about things not stated in the rules. Thanks for answering Swifty. @ThePro if your done replying thats fine but your opinion on the topic would be nice. 

 

 

 

I think that they should at least make these protocols public. That's my personal opinion.

btw not your done but *you're done (I had to, it annoys me)
 

[DaleGribble]

Agree 100% that the rules need updating. There are rules being enforced that aren't in the rule guide at all (such as scamming being allowed in an NCZ)

[Cyrus Raven]

I mean it depends entirely on whether or not this happens a lot, just because you might have gotten banned for something that wasn't explicitly in the rules doesn't mean this is necessarily a common occurrence. If that is the case then I would +1, if not then I would throw it up as a one-time case and move on.

[hunt]

You can earn a salary while in jail, can't you?

 

If you can you broke the rules by abusing the AFK timer. Just because your intention of reducing your jail sentence wasn't for in-game asset gains doesn't mean you couldn't have accidentally benefitted in that manner. 

 

It doesn't need to be written that explicitly circumventing an OOC force in the world is punishable.

[DGanja]

Do warnings and punishments never go away? That's what I heard, if so really it's only a matter of time till we all get the deportation permanently 

[37hh]

21 minutes ago, DGanja said:

Do warnings and punishments never go away? That's what I heard, if so really it's only a matter of time till we all get the deportation permanently 

or you just don't break rules

[DGanja]

12 minutes ago, 37hh said:

or you just don't break rules

Sometimes it's something stupid that leads to a warning. If you think you're never gonna make a mistake, you're dead wrong pal

[Loafism]

4 hours ago, agentxyz2 said:

It was stated to me that "There are protocols that we ban for". Forget my personal experience, how you guys feel about being able to be banned about things not stated in the rules.

 

Use your brain and think about your actions, if they're banning for things like your case then there is clearly no real issue in them doing so. Anyone with common sense can look at what you did and see that it shouldn't be done.

 

[Trac3rZ]

+1 if you ban someone at least it should be something publicly available in the rulebook. The same things goes for real life stuff as you can use loophole to bypass the law. Reading the comments, if Eclipse staff actually banned someone because he's AFK and it's not in the rulebook, it's Eclipse's fault

[agentxyz2]

3 hours ago, 37hh said:

or you just don't break rules

 

4 hours ago, hunt said:

You can earn a salary while in jail, can't you?

 

If you can you broke the rules by abusing the AFK timer. Just because your intention of reducing your jail sentence wasn't for in-game asset gains doesn't mean you couldn't have accidentally benefitted in that manner. 

 

It doesn't need to be written that explicitly circumventing an OOC force in the world is punishable.

41 minutes ago, Loafism said:

 

Use your brain and think about your actions, if they're banning for things like your case then there is clearly no real issue in them doing so. Anyone with common sense can look at what you did and see that it shouldn't be done.

 

@37hh @Loafism @hunt, I appreciate the responses, but I think your addressing this in the wrong direction. Instead of focusing on Me; this isn't about me. If you could respond to this scenario with a +1 in agreement or -1 in disagreement I'd appreciate it. Cheers. 

 

Player X was Specifically  banned for "ABC" and not one of Rules 1-15 of Eclipse Server rules. "ABC" is not stated in the server rules.  Do you believe that Eclipse should be responsible for disclosing "ABC" in their server rules? 

Simple as that, your +or- 1 will be much more helpful then analyzing my personal case, As example for Hunt who wrongly assumed I was in jail, Not having all the facts is not helpful, so its best to stay focused on the principle. 

[Cyrus Raven]

16 minutes ago, agentxyz2 said:

 

@37hh @Loafism @hunt, I appreciate the responses, but I think your addressing this in the wrong direction. Instead of focusing on Me; this isn't about me. If you could respond to this scenario with a +1 in agreement or -1 in disagreement I'd appreciate it. Cheers. 

 

Player X was Specifically  banned for "ABC" and not one of Rules 1-15 of Eclipse Server rules. "ABC" is not stated in the server rules.  Do you believe that Eclipse should be responsible for disclosing "ABC" in their server rules? 

Simple as that, your +or- 1 will be much more helpful then analyzing my personal case, As example for Hunt who wrongly assumed I was in jail, Not having all the facts is not helpful, so its best to stay focused on the principle. 

Let's say that the rule with regards to hacking and exploiting was not present in the rule book, do you think that it would be permissible for someone to hack the server or cheat? 

 

Generally speaking, all punishments should be under a rule set, but there are situations where the case is so specific that a rule wasn't specifically written for it. Let's take the example of abusing the AFK timer. We can induce that the reason why there is an AFK timer is so that players aren't left standing still in the middle of nowhere not interacting with people or for other purposes like farming paychecks. Essentially, the purpose of the mechanic is to indirectly tell players ''If you are online you should be working, interacting with people, RP'ing or otherwise mobile within the server and not AFK'. 

There might not be a specific rule that prevents this, but at the same time, it is fairly obvious that abusing this is antithetical to the system in place.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Kyle White Raven

[Yputi]

To clearify what rules exactly?
You want to not discuss your personal case, but I don't see what rule needs to be clarified next to your case and the one of scamming (imo).

You have to keep in mind, THEY provide YOU of the server. YOU join ECRP. If they want to randomly ban people, they can. If they want to, they should. If you don't like it, all you can do is let them know but they don't need to do anything if they don't want it. There are many cases where you can tell that even the person who gets punished could tell it is something you shouldn't do, but I would like to see specific points as this doesn't really start a discussion other then discussions about your personal ban.

At the end, it's not the law we are recreating, but if you have specific points and ideas they might have something they can actually do with this post as even I don't really know what to discuss here other then just giving a yay or nay.

Edited May 3, 2019 by Yputi

[agentxyz2]

@Kyle White Raven Fair points, but I have some rebuttals. I'd prefer to minimize debate in the post and leave it for honest first opinions, but I'll DM you. 

[agentxyz2]

2 minutes ago, Yputi said:

To clearify what rules exactly?
You want to not discuss your personal case, but I don't see what rule needs to be clarified accorsding to your case and the one of scamming (imo).

You have to keep in mind, THEY provide YOU of the server. YOU join ECRP. If they want to randomly ban people, they can. If they want to, they should. If you don't like it, all you can do is let them know but they don't need to do anything if they don't want it. There are many cases where you can tell that even the person who gets punished could tell it is something you shouldn't do, but I would like to see specific points as this doesn't really start a discussion other then discussions about your personal ban.

At the end, it's not the law we are recreating, but if you have specific points and ideas they might have something they can actually do with this post as even I don't really know what to discuss here other then just giving a yay or nay.

@Yputi Yay or Nay is all I'm really asking for. It seems that you side with 'They don't need to disclose specific rules for you to get banned, as its their server'. That's your opinion and I appreciate your input. 

[Yputi]

15 minutes ago, agentxyz2 said:

@Yputi Yay or Nay is all I'm really asking for. It seems that you side with 'They don't need to disclose specific rules for you to get banned, as its their server'. That's your opinion and I appreciate your input. 

I would like not to have conclusions shoved on my lap with my name on it, not even quoting what I exactly said. All I am saying that your post needs to be more specific and thought out as for me it comes over that you are still upset after your assets got removed and you want to show its stupid while knowing its quite obvious it was wrong what happend. 

Lets focus on this part I mentioned: "There are many cases where you can tell that even the person who gets punished could tell it is something you shouldn't do"

The rules don't specificly state stuff like: "Dont DDoS the server or your assets get removed!". We got norms and values and scripting/macro'ing is a no go. 

Also what I was saying with my comment: "We are not recreating the law". Basically, ECRP is not specialized in juridical stuff, its a game. Accept things not being perfect and try to support it by being more specific. The fact they got a lot of power and they could do a lot doesn't mean they abuse it or even fully use it.

This is how I support them and show them what I believe needs to be chanced regarding the rule book: 

 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Yputi

[agentxyz2]

@Yputi Apologies if I misinterpreted your stance, I just feel that things are drifting further from the posed topic. 

As noted in my OP, I'm simply asking if people believe Eclipse should disclose offenses that they have 'protocol to permanantly ban for'. For future posters reading, I'd appreciate a tighter focus to the topic. DM me if you want to continue the conversation. Cheers.

[KurtLaser]

15 hours ago, agentxyz2 said:

@Yputi Apologies if I misinterpreted your stance, I just feel that things are drifting further from the posed topic. 

As noted in my OP, I'm simply asking if people believe Eclipse should disclose offenses that they have 'protocol to permanantly ban for'. For future posters reading, I'd appreciate a tighter focus to the topic. DM me if you want to continue the conversation. Cheers.

Well the AFK example given shouldn't need to be in the rules as its common sense.

Id be more than happy to give some input if you could give me some other examples of people being banned for things that aren't in the ruleset, and aren't simple common sense. People will struggle to give you an opinion without enough reference material on the topic.

[DaleGribble]

56 minutes ago, KurtLaser said:

Well the AFK example given shouldn't need to be in the rules as its common sense.

Id be more than happy to give some input if you could give me some other examples of people being banned for things that aren't in the ruleset, and aren't simple common sense. People will struggle to give you an opinion without enough reference material on the topic.

I don't think it's just about things you can get banned for. There are official rules being enforced that aren't in the official rule guide - scamming in NCZ or the updated KOS rules for example. If you aren't awafe of these rules then that proves the point. They only exist in forum posts, not in the official published rule guide. When you consider how many new players are coming in its not right that the official rules aren't being kept updated in line with what's actually being enforced.

[KurtLaser]

41 minutes ago, DaleGribble said:

I don't think it's just about things you can get banned for. There are official rules being enforced that aren't in the official rule guide - scamming in NCZ or the updated KOS rules for example. If you aren't awafe of these rules then that proves the point. They only exist in forum posts, not in the official published rule guide. When you consider how many new players are coming in its not right that the official rules aren't being kept updated in line with what's actually being enforced.

KOS doesn't exist anymore. The new rules dictate that you MUST engage in roleplay before killing anybody. The Scamming one I agree would need to be updated.

All im asking for is examples so others can contribute. I understand what you all mean when you say theres official rules being enforced that aren't in the the official rule guide - All I am asking is if you can give me specifics of those rules.