[Discuss] Banning Characters

[Rob McDonald]

On 6/9/08, struik at t-online.de <struik at t-online.de> wrote:
>
> Tom Vogt wrote:
> >Ban her for wearing inappropriate socks to your dinner party, if you
> >want. You can be as arbitrary as you like, as long as the other PLAYER
> >knows that the reason isn't his inactivity. What you do to his
> >CHARACTER I don't care about, the Inalienable Rights are there to
> >protect players, not characters.
>
> Bah, tom this is a really crap statement from you.
> You normally do not open the door so wide for the word weasels.
> Basically you stated, ban them for inactivity, but make sure you name it
> differently.
>
> You state you protect the players, not the characters. But if the char get
> banned from the realm because of results of his inactivity as the word
> weasels will find enough reasons there, than basically char and player melt
> together and some "valid" reason will be found.
>
> With this statement you do not protect the players inactivity, you
> encourage that players characters get banned for inactivity, just that it is
> named differently.




I agree with this. What stops unscrupulous players
banning/fining another player for inactivity/recruiting wrongly/being the
wrong class and then just giving the reason as that they were wearing the
wrong socks to a dinner party/had a stupid haircut?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://news.battlemaster.org/pipermail/discuss-moderated/attachments/20080609/92ed0f14/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------


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