[Discuss] Dictator abusing power

[Eric Kenseth]

On 9/24/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  Weaseling around, sidestepping the inalieanable right in any matter is
> > absolutely a no-no if I have understood Tom's intentions correctly.
> > Personally, my opinion, do not even venture down that path..
> >
> >  It's absolutely, strictly, completely off limits
>
> Yes, but that doesn't mean you should create new inalienable rights -
> "Being a priest of religion X" is not an inalienable right.
>
> The inalienable rights are intentionally very simple so there is no
> room for any lawyering - if what you're doing isn't specifically what
> the right says, then you're fine. If you are doing what the right
> says, then you are not fine, regardless of the spin or justification
> you give.

Then don't ban for priestyness. Just say that it is a bannable offence
to spread the religeon in question in your lands. Then say it is a
bannable offence to leave the realm without the council's concent.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. There should be a justifyable,
non-inalienable, ban within a week or so.

Seriously, be creative. Most any ban for most any reason can be
justified if you just do it In Character and for crap reasons.
Activity is guarded heavily, but other then that the other rights can
be punished if you don't scream to the community that you are
punishing them for that... Like if a noble always buys cavalry, even
though there is a mostly walled war going on, andthen he leaves for a
tournement just before a major attack, theres pleanty of ways to skin
that cat. Make up a BSed message 'from a spy in the enemy realm' that
is evidence that said member is a spy for the enemy. I've seen it
done, it works. Banishment for almost any BS reason is a judges almost
inalienable right.


-- 
Unsubscribing and other list options:
http://news.battlemaster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss