Hm, I believe you called him fakegirl, thought that point wasn't entirely clear
The point being, you were puposely annoying her, and yes I am Mordred.
Also the story is meant to show that you tend to twist the truth a little, since you said that there was an RP reason for the bounty, which wasn't the case, and I believe you knew that
Also: I never said "never cry over a kill" I know that I tend to overreact, since a characteristic flaw of mine is, that I want what I consider injustice to be punished quite badly
You think I was having fun spending my time being threatened and having to inform her about the rules when I could be having fun? How can you know my purpose? Internet-mindreading perhaps?
Also the story is meant to show that you tend to twist the truth a little, since you said that there was an RP reason for the bounty, which wasn't the case, and I believe you knew that
I've never twisted the truth, I was told by Reginald that he could put up the bounty for me, which was done. It was not my bounty but Reginalds. I think you have missunderstood- just like above. If you wanna keep discussing this I suggest you do it somewhere else.
Im having problem with Inzumis administration. This is how it goes
1. I am having a war, or a "revolution" against the Townwatch with some allies. After respawning 2 times and rejoining the revolution, Inzumi says I cannot do this anymore since that would break some rule that, Nobody also later confirmed, doesn't exist. There is no limit of neither wars nor revolution as long as it has a RP-reason. Knowing that Nobody confirmed me, Inzumi still insists that she is right and threatens to kick me if I don't stop "complaining", by what she means informing here.
2. After this Inzumi claims that you can never kill an individual that is unarmed. I inform her that the rules says that you can if you have a good roleplay reason (lets say for example if you are doing a robbery and the individual runs and you warn him that he will be shot if he does). This makes Inzumi very angry, and she threatens to kick me if I don't stop "insulting" her. Somehow, informing her about the rules she does not know is an insult.
3. Inzumi now refers to me as a "troll" and ignores my question how I am a "troll". Izumi says that what Nobody says ( that I see as the head admin) does not matter as she doesn't care even "if it would be a hundred of him". She says that If I am not quiet I will be kicked for "trolling".
Clearly there is something very wrong with this kind of use of the adminpowers and I would happily see it fixed very soon.
Well, then I will tell the story now as it REALLY was.
1.
This person, Norpheus, was indeed member of this revolution. I watched him rejoining it five times, where he called himself "Norpheus" first, then "Norpheus II" and so on. I read one or two complains about him because he was always doing exactly the same thing. I asked him friendly if he could not do another thing now, because as far as I know, you can't just rejoin a running "war" (I put this in "" because it was not exactly a war) and fighting over and over again in that.
The resulf of this was that he started to affirm that I don't know the rules and that I'm a bad admin.
Then he said that he is talking with Nobody right at this point and that Nobody said "its ok".
Firstly, even if that would have been true, everyone can say that, so as long as I get no proof, I can't of course stop arguing.
Secondly, even if it was true, I don't think that Nobody is able to make a decision about that when he is not in the game and when he only heard the one site, him.
2.
I never said that you can't kill an unarmed. I said that you need a VERY GOOD rp reason. What you stated in your post is an example for a situation where you can attack an unarmed. However, I got a complain about you killing an unarmed person while this person is buying a weapon, without doing anything before to harm you. This is NOT a very good rp reason, it's not even a reasonable one.
You continued insulting me after I said that, even if I was still friendly to you. I tould you to stop this whole discussion now, because it leads to nothing AND is spamming the chat. You, however, continued.
Mordred then started with the sentence "Izumi - don't feed the troll, just ignore him.". I answered: "Yes, I will stop now and just ignore him." After this, you got even more angry and started to insult Mordred too.
3.
I have not ever called you a troll once, also you have not asked me "Why are you calling me troll?" (at least I have not seen it in the chat).
To the thing with Nobody - I said that even if you are in the chat with a hundred Nobody's, I will not stop assuming you that you are acting wrong, because of the point I stated above. As long as I do not know if you are telling the truth with this "I'm at mumble with Nobody and he told me it's ok." and as long as Nobody does not look at the situation himself and also hears the statement of the other side (mine in this case), he can't make a decision about something like this on the server.
I as admin can also not kick someone just because one other person complains about him without have seen it myself.
I would really like to know why you are misrepresenting the real situation in this way here. I have never done anything to you, so why are you doing that?
PS: By the way, I'm male (you are saying "she" the whole time).
It's a japanese name. A lot of japanese names can be uses for both males and females, so don't worry.
EDIT:
Because this situation is pointless, leads to nothing and will just spam the thread, I will not say any more about it here. I defined my side of the view and that's it. If you still think I am lying, we can open a poll-thread and let the people who are online at this time vote. Or just ask Nobody for the log of the chat.
Well, then I will tell the story now as it REALLY was.
1.
This person, Norpheus, was indeed member of this revolution. I watched him rejoining it five times, where he called himself "Norpheus" first, then "Norpheus II" and so on. I read one or two complains about him because he was always doing exactly the same thing. I asked him friendly if he could not do another thing now, because as far as I know, you can't just rejoin a running "war" (I put this in "" because it was not exactly a war) and fighting over and over again in that.
If there is a war ongoing - and as I said it was not only me- there is no rule saying taht you cannot rejoin that war X times. There is neither no limit to the amount of war - you jsut need an RP reason. 2 wars in a row is not much - and certainly not unrealistic when they were taking heavy taxes again and again.
The resulf of this was that he started to affirm that I don't know the rules and that I'm a bad admin.
True, but that Is why you should be able to get on mumble, like me and other admins.
Secondly, even if it was true, I don't think that Nobody is able to make a decision about that when he is not in the game and when he only heard the one site, him.
What you stated in your post is an example for a situation where you can attack an unarmed. However, I got a complain about you killing an unarmed person while this person is buying a weapon, without doing anything before to harm you. This is NOT a very good rp reason, it's not even a reasonable one.
Sorry but you have missunderstood - again. It was not I who did it- I just said that it is possible to kill unarmed folks becuase the person said you can never do that- and you directly drew the false assumption that It was me who killed the person. You have lied again and it worries me that RCC has lying admins. The person who killed the unarmed was the person who was being debated.
You continued insulting me after I said that, even if I was still friendly to you. I tould you to stop this whole discussion now, because it leads to nothing AND is spamming the chat. You, however, continued.
Ive asked you about 3 times and Ill do it again just for you - how did I insult you?
Mordred then started with the sentence "Izumi - don't feed the troll, just ignore him.". I answered: "Yes, I will stop now and just ignore him." After this, you got even more angry and started to insult Mordred too.
3.
I have not ever called you a troll once, also you have not asked me "Why are you calling me troll?" (at least I have not seen it in the chat).
To the thing with Nobody - I said that even if you are in the chat with a hundred Nobody's, I will not stop assuming you that you are acting wrong, because of the point I stated above. As long as I do not know if you are telling the truth with this "I'm at mumble with Nobody and he told me it's ok." and as long as Nobody does not look at the situation himself and also hears the statement of the other side (mine in this case), he can't make a decision about something like this on the server.
I as admin can also not kick someone just because one other person complains about him without have seen it myself.
Lies again. You began talking about trolls and refer to me in third person as a troll. As our realities clearly disagree i guess that next time ill have to take print screens of the chat and then you can come up with whatever you want. I can agree that it does not matter what "Nobody says on mumble" but it shows the need of being able to be on mumble -especially if you are an admin.
I would really like to know why you are misrepresenting the real situation in this way here. I have never done anything to you, so why are you doing that?
Beside accusing me of insulting you, accusing me of repeated complaining, accusing me of breaking rules that doesn't exist, refering to me as a troll, and threatening to kick me and now coming up with a reality that doesn't exist, you have indeed done "nothing". But I guess there is no point in this.
PS: By the way, I'm male (you are saying "she" the whole time).
Actually you had the first post in which you wrote "she", so you began.
Just kidding, all that aside, continueing this thing feels kinda silly. Just stop arguing with admins, Norph, at least in the fashion that you do now, and thing will be good
Izumi, leaving the server and rejoining with a new name is actually a way through NLR. If you do that, you can keep restarting a faction, as you lose everything, and it's a new character.
P.S I'm not supporting either side, as I don't know quite what happened.
Izumi, leaving the server and rejoining with a new name is actually a way through NLR. If you do that, you can keep restarting a faction, as you lose everything, and it's a new character.
P.S I'm not supporting either side, as I don't know quite what happened.
Izumi, leaving the server and rejoining with a new name is actually a way through NLR. If you do that, you can keep restarting a faction, as you lose everything, and it's a new character.
P.S I'm not supporting either side, as I don't know quite what happened.
But with your new character joining a battle you got no in-character reason for joining is wrong isn't it? Even if it was right, would it be okay to rejoin the battle several times for no apparent reason?
If this is okay and people start to think like this there will be a hell of a lot of non rule breaking deathmatching going on.
Izumi, leaving the server and rejoining with a new name is actually a way through NLR. If you do that, you can keep restarting a faction, as you lose everything, and it's a new character.
P.S I'm not supporting either side, as I don't know quite what happened.
But with your new character joining a battle you got no in-character reason for joining is wrong isn't it? Even if it was right, would it be okay to rejoin the battle several times for no apparent reason?
If this is okay and people start to think like this there will be a hell of a lot of non rule breaking deathmatching going on.
I just think that, having to erase your entire history and connections every time you die in order to continue playing, and then making very thin roleplay justifications for resurrecting their respective factions and such is...mentally inhibited. I personally don't hold anyone to the NLR rule that I end up killing, because by now half of my timezone would be under new identities.
I just think that, having to erase your entire history and connections every time you die in order to continue playing, and then making very thin roleplay justifications for resurrecting their respective factions and such is...mentally inhibited. I personally don't hold anyone to the NLR rule that I end up killing, because by now half of my timezone would be under new identities.
I just think that, having to erase your entire history and connections every time you die in order to continue playing, and then making very thin roleplay justifications for resurrecting their respective factions and such is...mentally inhibited. I personally don't hold anyone to the NLR rule that I end up killing, because by now half of my timezone would be under new identities.
You took one part of my entire statement there out of context, and claimed its the very purpose of the server. My point however, is that no matter how many people I've killed, the world remains basically the same, just with less roleplay because people have to use bs logic loopholes in order to justify the continued existence of their faction and/or identity. There is no persistence, continuity, etc.
I'd like to see a single storyline that's gone on, on this server, for more than two hours. Killing off an entire faction is easy really. One battle and they're done. How is that in the least bit entertaining?
And to tell you what, I'll prove my point by having my organization eliminate the entire Templar faction.
I just think that, having to erase your entire history and connections every time you die in order to continue playing, and then making very thin roleplay justifications for resurrecting their respective factions and such is...mentally inhibited. I personally don't hold anyone to the NLR rule that I end up killing, because by now half of my timezone would be under new identities.
You took one part of my entire statement there out of context, and claimed its the very purpose of the server. My point however, is that no matter how many people I've killed, the world remains basically the same, just with less roleplay because people have to use bs logic loopholes in order to justify the continued existence of their faction and/or identity. There is no persistence, continuity, etc.
I'd like to see a single storyline that's gone on, on this server, for more than two hours. Killing off an entire faction is easy really. One battle and they're done. How is that in the least bit entertaining?
And to tell you what, I'll prove my point by having my organization eliminate the entire Templar faction.
I have been able to "survive" with most of my characters. It's not hard if you just stay with some friends and roleplay without using a lot of violence. Some characters have been alive for several days. Of course I don't count randoming deaths.
Maybe there is a point in everything being dangerous. It would be weird if everyone just continued playing with the character they just killed BUT as you pointed out, everyone does this even though the new life rule is in effect.
Here's my suggestion about rules (and welcome message at the same time)
Welcome to RCC, such a perfect serv
Here we have some rules, let us lay them down
Don't make waves, stay in line
And we'll get along fine
RCC is a perfect place
Keep your feet off the grass
Shine your shoes, wipe your...face
RCC is, RCC is
RCC is a perfect place
As somebody shut down the guy..and I still believe I wrote something usefull...(maybe)
I will move my post here(just to save it from oblivion )
I do agree that admins HAVE TO! fallow rules..but...
It is like with modern police...If you put to many regulations on them..to much paper work..They would become afraid of doing their job.
I believe that the best solution is to divide ADMIN FORCE(senior admins/regular admins) and work in kind of legal process:
1.regular admin can and should make quick decision on sight
2.case go (immediate post after end of session so we have it next day) to official (RCC) court thread where regular admin should provide evidence (screenshots,witness relation,chatlog if necessary)
3.there is time for community (procurators and deffenders) to respond (24 hours) in which time player is banned
4. - if guilty then senior admin decide on further action (longer ban or permaban)
- if not guilty ( which means nothing was proved - Latin law) regular admin HAST TO ADMIT IT and APPOLOGIZE or he should face his own trial (corrupted admin)
This is the way how law and just rule works.
EDIT: I am in the mood so pls do not take my massage to seriously.. but.. I think I got the point:
Every clever person can go around your rules. If you ban all clever ppl you will have only..(no further comments) on server
hehe, NOVICIUS we designed the rules. then, we find ways around them. it's OUR job to do that, everyone else who does it gets banned. just kidding. i tell people that deliberately looking for loopholes is against the rules. lol
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
