Documenting RP with screenshots - wording

[Olipro]

Currently, the rule states:

• If you perform an action which will influence potential RP in the future, you must have OOC evidence of performing said RP. 

  • OOC evidence should consist of a recording or screenshot and it needs to be timestamped (/time).

 

I have not heard clarity from any admin regarding this, but, as it stands, a screenshot of your RP will always contain a timestamp since there's one at the bottom of the screen. I have heard from some that your RP becomes invalid if you forget to use /time

 

This strikes me as an unfair technicality; the UI essentially has integrated proof.

 

Whether or not this is currently considered "invalidating" - the rules should either be updated to clarify that /time is not required if the unix timestamp is present or, if it currently is, that should be changed. Evidence of some RP should not be nullified for a purely technical reason of running a command when that command is redundant.

Edited March 19, 2020 by Olipro

[Donovan]

It is not redundant, usage of /time gives a more accurate and easier way to see time without having to convert the unix. I do not see the big deal of typing /time every 48h to support your RP ? If you are doing same type of action that can influence potential RP ie: putting on gloves, throwing away your license, burning your fingerprints etc. etc. you will be doing it or encountering situations in which that RP will be needed daily, so by doing 1 simple command of /time as an addition to the RP you do anyways every 48h to extend the validation of it is not that big of a deal, to be honest this post feels more like a try to get a way out and to make something that is currently easy, even easier because of laziness

[Olipro]

It is not more accurate. The unix timestamp is to-the-second.

It also has nothing to do with laziness; We execute RP to create scenarios. The purpose of requiring a timestamp is to verify someone is not attempting to cheat. The unix timestamp satisfies that goal.

Of course, being able to whine your way out of a scenario that's not in your favour on such a technicality is no doubt quite appealing but is exploiting the meta and textbook ruleplay. I see no good-faith basis for objecting.

[Chunder]

SUGGESTION DENIED

Thank you for your patience while this suggestion was being reviewed/researched.

After reviewing/researching this suggestion, we have decided to deny it for the following reason(s): 

• The rule has been updated to contain the mention of UNIX.

This decision is final. Unless instructed to, do not post another suggestion pertaining to this topic. You will still be able to submit other suggestions on the forums.

Regards,

Chunder