Infractions and Consequences

[Lathander]

We've gone back and looked at every rule breaking activity and subsequent consequence as far as the board will go. Trust me, it goes back a long way! The purpose of this endeavor is to provide a system of infractions/consequences that is fair to everyone in the FK community. Based on the research into past transgressions, we have divided the infractions into 8 categories and 3 types. What follows is the third rough draft of the list, NOT our set policy. We value the input of all members of the FK community in determining the final draft of this policy. Please take a few moments to review this list and offer your opinions and/or constructive suggestions.

Some preliminaries:
All consequences refer to 1st time offenses. Continued rule-breaking may result in harsher penalties.
Mitigating circumstances may come into play (e.g. newbies MAY receive lesser consequences than longer-term players)
"PC" refers to "Player Character" not "Personal Computer"
"Punish" refers to the "punish" command which reduces xp and kismet
Please read the current "help strike" in game for details of this consequence
Imms dealing with violators retain their discrestion to increase/decrease consequences based on new information and the attitude of the player
Type 1 = Minor, does not cause much harm
Type 2 = Indirect harm (e.g. provides for an unfair advantage)
Type 3 = Direct harm to others

Cheating:
1 OOC arranging to transfer coins/eq (intent uncompleted) Punish and Verbal Warning
2 Asking for OOC or IC help in solving riddle-type quests Strike
2 Use of scripts/bots/triggers for any purpose Strike and removal of PC gains from the script
2 Evading limits set by builders (practicing skills in an un-IC manner) Reduction of skill to zero and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (aid/stun/repeat to gain favor/xp) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (purchasing or owning too many "special" items) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (shoving mobs aside to avoid programs) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Getting multiple rewards for repeatedly finishing the same quest Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 OOC transferring coins/eq (intent completed) Deletion of 1 PC and a Strike

Harassment:
3 Non-profane harrassment of Player Council/Imms Strike
3 Profane harrassment of Player Council/Imms Strike, possible Deletion or Ban
3 Choosing a profane name for a PC Deletion and possible Ban
3 Excess OOC profanity Account Destruction and Ban
3 Any threat to cause direct harm to the game (hack, spam, etc) Account Destruction and Ban

Minions:
1 Minions doing things outside of their abilities Punish or Other, dependant on the specific action
3 Killing a minion w/no rp Strike

Multiplay:
2 PCs in the same account aiding each other (materially, non-materially, corpse retrieval, etc.) Deletion of 1 PC and a Strike
2 Two or more players sharing the same PC Account Destruction
2 Owning more than one account Account Destruction (Leave 1) and Strike

Pkill:
3 Pkill (even with rp) in the newbie temples Strike
3 Pkill without sufficient rp Strike

Policy:
1 Entering a PC storeroom uninvited without taking anything Punish and Verbal Warning
2 Players/accounts logging in from a school IP without prior approval Ban the school IP
3 Looting a PC storeroom Strike, possible Deletion

RP:
1 RP of a special nature that has not been approved through the application process Punish and told to cease the activity
1 Purposely avoiding roleplay Punish or Other, dependant on the specific action
1 RP not in keeping with alignment (no approved app for change) Punish and Verbal Warning
1 Ruining an imm-run RP Helled for remainder of the rp and Punish
2 RP not in keeping with alignment, CN acting evil (no approved app for change) Alignment change and Strike
3 Avoiding rp after taking an item from a PC corpse Strike
3 Stealing from a link-dead PC Reduction of skill to zero and a Strike
3 Using the newbie temples to escape rp consequences Ban (one-month)

Sex:
1 IC discussions of rape Punish and Verbal Warning
1 Unacceptable (but not excessive) sexual rp Punish and Verbal Warning
3 Overt IC sexual behavior or profanity Strike

[Dalvyn]

First, thank you for the important effort to compile all those things. A few comments and suggestions:

Cheating:
1 OOC arranging to transfer coins/eq (intent uncompleted) Punish and Verbal Warning
2 Asking for OOC or IC help in solving riddle-type quests Strike

+ failure of the quest

2 Use of scripts/bots/triggers for any purpose Strike and removal of PC gains from the script
2 Evading limits set by builders (practicing skills in an un-IC manner) Reduction of skill to zero and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (aid/stun/repeat to gain favor/xp) Deletion of the PC and a Strike

Wouldn't setting the favour to the minimal value (damned) be more consistent with the previous one, instead of deletion?

2 Evading limits set by builders (purchasing or owning too many "special" items) Deletion of the PC and a Strike

Similarly, replace deletion of the PC with removal of the related items (and more maybe)?

2 Evading limits set by builders (shoving mobs aside to avoid programs) Deletion of the PC and a Strike

What about strike + OOC consequences of the shoving? (e.g., ban from a guild/city, and so on).

2 Getting multiple rewards for repeatedly finishing the same quest Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 OOC transferring coins/eq (intent completed) Deletion of 1 PC and a Strike

I am wondering if the difference between the first case (intent uncompleted) and this case (intent completed) is not too important. The first one is just some finger wiggling 'No, no, you cannot do that' while the second is 'strike and your character does not exist anymore'. I would suggest perhaps raising the punishment for the first one to a strike, since multiplay is a big thing.

Harassment:
3 Non-profane harrassment of Player Council/Imms Strike
3 Profane harrassment of Player Council/Imms Strike, possible Deletion or Ban

I am unsure what you mean by "profane" here. I would add "in-game" to the description of those offences (because we can't really do much about what happens out of the game). What about harassment of players? I would think that it should be punished more harshly than harassment of Player Council/Imms.

...
Minions:
1 Minions doing things outside of their abilities Punish or Other, dependant on the specific action

... including removal of the minion

...
Policy:
2 Players/accounts logging in from a school IP without prior approval Ban the school IP

Erm... What does that mean?

...
2 RP not in keeping with alignment, CN acting evil (no approved app for change) Alignment change and Strike

+ loss of previous gain (through IC or OOC ways).

For example: choosing CN to join guilds in Silverymoon then turning evil once you have learned all the spells -> your brain is magically purged of all knowledge specific to Silverymoon.

...
1 IC discussions of rape Punish and Verbal Warning

This one does not make much sense to me. Forcing a rape roleplay on someone might be punishable, but I see no reason to ban rape as a discussion topic.

1 Unacceptable (but not excessive) sexual rp Punish and Verbal Warning

This one is very subjective, perhaps too subjective. What is "acceptable" and "unacceptable" varies greatly from one person to another, and even more between the US and Europe.

[Jaenoic]

Reading through them, I am greatly thankful that such a list has been compiled. I see and hear about a lot of cheating/abuse going on and it makes me sad that people in our wonderful little game choose to play that way, so I'm glad that rules have been laid down. But I have a few thoughts on some of the points.

3 Stealing from a link-dead PC Reduction of skill to zero and a Strike

What about afk characters?

2 Evading limits set by builders (aid/stun/repeat to gain favor/xp) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (purchasing or owning too many "special" items) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (shoving mobs aside to avoid programs) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Getting multiple rewards for repeatedly finishing the same quest Deletion of the PC and a Strike

Deletion seems rather harsh. On one hand, I appreciate it because it would help deter these things from happening. On the other hand, I guess I feel that more IC punishments would be, well, more ICly appropriate, and that is what the game is based on.

1 IC discussions of rape Punish and Verbal Warning

I disagree, Dalvyn. Rape is a very sensitive issue for some, if not many, and we have younger players who play too. I imagine talking about it makes many players uncomfortable, so I feel that it's better to just avoid it all together.

[Dalvyn]

1 IC discussions of rape Punish and Verbal Warning

I disagree, Dalvyn. Rape is a very sensitive issue for some, if not many, and we have younger players who play too. I imagine talking about it makes many players uncomfortable, so I feel that it's better to just avoid it all together.

Some players might also consider torture a very sensitive issue. Or what about murder? Oh... and what about ceremonies during which followers of evil god sacrifice a corpse? Or ... simply, what about just killing someone to get his/her belongings?

I think all players should be given a chance to get out of a roleplay involving a rape, just as I think that all players should be given a chance to get out of a pkill roleplay. But I do not think that rape should be branded a taboo topic, just the other possibly delicate subjects cited above should not be branded taboo. Everyone should still be free to leave a roleplay or a discussion involving them though.

[Kregor]

1 Unacceptable (but not excessive) sexual rp Punish and Verbal Warning

This one is very subjective, perhaps too subjective. What is "acceptable" and "unacceptable" varies greatly from one person to another, and even more between the US and Europe.

I have to agree here. We use the term PG-13 in some places, while the ratings board themselves seems to be all over the spectrum on what they rate a movie that is PG-13. I personally have seen the broad spectrum that the rating allows, both in movies and in the game. On one hand one imm could feel a smote goes too far, while another imm will echo "Oh, come now, you can do better than that"

I have also been party to discussions among players that involve debate on what is or is not inappropriate. Obviously, now, there has to be some point of player discretion (if it's inappropriate for one participant in RP, then common courtesy dictates.) but as far as knowing what to call too much from a rule standpoint, I think many other players might agree that rules should be decided by imm consensus and posted to the policies thread.

In my mind, the more precise, the better. If a guildeline is, no smoting below the neckline, put it in print. If you can't grab someone's arse, put it in print, and so on... It may sound tedious to some, but it would end murmuring as to whether someone oversteps their bounds, and also allow help assure someone who wants to draw the line doesn't get on the receiving end of OOC harassment that they could have done more.

[Dalvyn]

I am not sure that such a consensus is possible, nor desirable.

I would rather have a practical rule saying that, if you feel uncomfortable with a roleplay that is going on, or if you think that someone went overboard with a smote, then simply leave the roleplay/discussion. And if you cannot leave, then say OOCly that it makes you feel uncomfortable. Sometimes, that can be as simple as that. Most people will just leave it at that and go on.

[Shabanna]

I was going to just sit out of this thread but I felt like after reading this I needed to comment on the topic of rape. As an adult who was assaulted as a young woman... I feel I am more sensitive to this topic than some but I have to agree with Dalvyn that it perhaps should not be a taboo subject. But, for reasons perhaps different than his.

Let me first say, I do not think... that having a game filled with rapists is Dalvyn's intent. But...I think allowing it as a possibility ( perhaps by special app?) might be good. My reason is simple... I have been at the receiving end of an RP that for the char ICLY would have been called "date" rape. OOC it was a frustrating situation... RPing late... no Imms noone on question...and trusting another player...not to break that rule. in reality it did not turn out that way and I wound up logging off really angry and disturbed just a few months after I had begun playing and made the character. With no way to log and no proof... the other player could not be turned in ( though a complaint was filed.) As a result, ICLy I had to find a way to RP the future choices of my character in a way that did not break the rules and it was a sad situation.

Where am I going with this? I believe that if a character does this to another... there need to be IC consequences other than...the victim having to justify their behavior around the other player of course ideally if it is against the rules the person violating the rules should be punished accordingly but... the reality is that does not always happen :p because its hard to turn someone in without a witness or a log. It is one players word against anothers.

that said...

I feel like if I had had the choice to apply to deal with this person ICly would have!! (Even if I had to apply and lay my plans out on the line.) Also, I feel that if the "help sex" regulations were REALLY well defined and detailed the RP of Rape might not end up as being as graphic an RP as one thinks? ...and indeed with those regulations more detailed and more strictly enforced it might be less of a risk that some character would overstep their bounds with another and it "turn into " a rape RP ( if that makes sense) And as Dalvyn said someone should be able to walk away from that RP ( even if it is someone just hearing about it.. who choses not to... they can simply walk away from the RP and have that choice!)

Personally, I feel if it is allowed it should be CLOSELY regulated by application... so that we didn't have an onslaught of serial rapists or something And I agree that a player should be able to say STOP IT... period. When that RP happend to me it was incredibly unsettling, as I did not expect it because it is not allowed and trusted that the other player would obey the rules. If had been a possibility I might have been more prepared for the RP and stopped it before it happened.

I agree with Dalvyn that the game in general has a lot of topics that can be found unsettling, torture, death, killing , stealing, alternative lifestyles, all of these things might not be the best subject matter for a young kid... but then I am a parent who would no more allow my 15 year old on this game than I would fly lol >.< (I have 3 kids...and I monitor their internet like a hawk... lol) I think simply making it an app only RP would restrict the possiblity of it becoming epidemic? (much like the reason for alt lifestye apps) Also... perhaps the age of the player would be part of determining approval or not?

That is my 2 cents on the matter. I hope it was not too fuzzy
" The Banna"

[Enig]

I realise that these posts are about the nature of punishments for various infractions, and not really about whether or not x or y should be considered breaches of the rules, but all the same I'd like to say a few words on the subject; I'll try to be brief, however.

Whether we agree with the distinction or not, there is definitely a difference in the perceived 'wrongness' of a plain old physical attack, even to the degree of torture, than there is with any sort of a sexual assault; the latter is generally considered more heinous and 'evil' in the grand scheme of things, or at least the more taboo of the two. We needn't look any further than the posting to see the evidence of this fact; if it wasn't true to at least some degree, we wouldn't probably be having this discussion now.

In a world where magical healing is as close as the nearest cleric with a holy symbol, physical damage is almost trivial; not entirely, but the trauma associated with injuries like broken bones and mangled flesh is somewhat mitigated when these things can be washed away with a prayer and a hope. On the other hand, sexual assault is something that can affect a character and influence their behaviour and decisions years into their future, and herein lies the heart of the problem. Any RP involving this subject tends to either be such a serious thing that the character cannot help but be heavily influenced by it, or else it's brushed aside and the gravity of the crime (in an IC and OOC sense, as it were) is sort of lightened in an unpleasant way (you could make the same argument for IC torture in this case, and I'd probably agree, mind you).

That being said, and assuming for the sake of argument that the RPed assault is not brushed over, the victim character will tend to be altered strongly by it, and as a result, the people they interact with will be altered and affected by it, too. It's a nice enough idea to say, "If you don't want to become involved in an RP about rape, just don't.", but once you've got one victim, others will naturally become involved via innocent interaction. Once it starts, it's impossible to contain, as it were, and the more instances of it taking place ICly, the greater the chance of having just the wrong person/people involved and the entire situation turning into a great big OOC mess.

Anyways, as things stand, the help file states that it's categorically against the rules to RP any scenes involving rape, and frankly, I don't think there's any reason to argue against that. Considering the wide range of alternative avenues for RP, I honestly cannot think of any situation that would demand this form of RP and leave no other viable options open. That said, why even leave the option open, when there's such potential for nastiness and hard feelings because of it?

(As a coincidence, sorry for babbling on so much. Thanks for reading me )

[Scylere]

Sorry, if I don't understand, but are we seriously considering making the option of RAPE rp available?

My opinion is that we shouldn't be describing anything of the sort, whether it be self-mutilation, torture, rape, sexual encounters, etc. Even battles shouldn't be too explicit. There's just no reason for such detail.

I question the person's mind that feels they have to role play that kind of sickness into a game. It's a game and a game supposed to be available to kids - descriptions of any of the things I mentioned above can be highly disturbing, traumatizing, mental scarring, twisting, and completely detrimental to a child's developement and social life.

Forgive me if I've misunderstood the intention here.

[Balek]

I'd like to point out that Dalvyn never advocated rape roleplay. He did say that IC discussion of rape should not be a punishable without regard to circumstance. Threat of rape or forcing a rape RP on someone should be punished. In all honesty, rape is a topic I would rather stay away from completely. I do recognize however that there are people who would apply for this kind of thing. From a moral standpoint I don't mind if two people agree that they want to participate in a rape roleplay. As far as I'm concerned if it occurs between two consenting adults of legal age then we are not obliged to prevent the roleplay from going forward. However I strongly feel that there would need to be very well thought out and exceptionally well justified applications from all parties involved and there would need to be absolute certainty that no one involved had any reservations at all.

All this aside, I feel like we might want to ban rape roleplays in general strictly from a practical legal point of view. Take in mind that I am not an attorney and at no time should this be construed as sound legal advice. If we get into the business of approving rapes it seems to me that someone could return at a later date with accusations that we in fact facilitated and approved sexual harassment. I'm not sure of the legal climate in other countries but in America our society has grown to be exceptionally litigious. I would hate to see the game's admins endangered by this kind of threat. I like to think that anyone who applies for a roleplay of this kind would be secure in his or her choice, but there are invariably people who change their minds. Even worse, there are people (certainly here in America and likely everywhere else) who would do this kind of thing just to sue and make some money. We've got some great people playing here, but we don't know everyone and we can't predict the future.

I apologize if this has gotten a bit long winded, somewhat weighty and maybe a little depressing. I just want to make sure we're taking everything into account with a topic as delicate as this one.

[Kregor]

Sorry, if I don't understand, but are we seriously considering making the option of RAPE rp available?

No, scroll up two posts...

The point that was being gotten to was there should be leeway... not to feel free to RP rape and rape someone... but not to ban the discussion ICly of the offense. The case in point, dealt with a player who crossed the line and forced themself ICly upon another char. The character who was the recipient of this wasn't a willing party in it, but, fact of the matter, it happened, and since the victim uses a mac, she can't log the text, so... it becomes a he said, she said situation (though for the record, it was my wife who was forced into the RP, and I saw it, over her shoulder on her telnet screen)

Anyway... so in the end... she of course, wants nothing to do, OOCly OR ICly with said character/player, and she can't even ICly explain why?

1) He should have been punished, not because you need a special rule, but because it amounts to harassment to force someone into a sexual RP they didn't consent to.

2) She should be able to have an IC reason to shun said character, and said character should have the IC consequence of being branded with the crime he committed.

End of story.

As is stands, the total taboo of discussing rape means she has to just ignore him, (which could be accused as avoiding RP) and cannot tell anyone WHY she won't ICly associate with him.

[Enaria]

I guess I don't have much to say really, but I'm just curious if the rules we have in right now aren't working? I mean, I just read through these, and... part of me is now terrified to play. I know I don't break any of those rules, but that list was... overwhelming to me. Maybe I'm the only one? So, sorry that this probably didn't give too much input. Though the school IP thing is sort of weird.

Also, I forgot who said it, but I agree if we can do all this 'evil' stuff, like just killing, murder, torture, sacraficing, someone couldn't bring up the topic of rape? I mean people like anything, can avoid it... Though that sort of, contradicts the avoiding RP rule, which I think people should be allowed to avoid any RP that makes them uncomfortable, for any reason. Even if it's ridiculous, I know I don't want anyone to be uncomfortable for any reason.

So, sorry again, if that didn't make sense as well... I just thought I would put my opinion out there, because I rarely do.

[Enig]

I think I can understand your position, Kregor, but at the same time I'm not sure that allowing for the IC discussion of this kind of RP is the best way to solve this. It just seems to me that it would legitimize the implied sort of RP that lead to the situation with Shabanna's player, and that wouldn't make things better so much as worse.

On the other hand, I think we can all pretty much agree that the situation above indicates a certain problem; however, maybe it could be handled differently than suggested. So, if I can offer an alternative, maybe the rule that needs a bit of laxing isn't so much the one about rape as it is the one about avoiding RP. It seems to me that Shabanna's player should have felt free to either turn the other player around with osays, or failing that, push on the quit button at any point during the scene. I can only assume that she didn't feel this way because she didn't want to be accused of avoiding RP, and when it gets to that point, it seems there's a problem; after all, where's the line drawn? Torture and explicitly violent RP would evoke the same sort of response, and demand the same, and this would seem to help out in that avenue, too.

Anyways, it's just a suggestion, so take of it what you will, but it seems to me that a few extra cases of 'He said/She said' relating to RP dodging are preferable to a few extra cases of the same relating to darker subjects.

[Lerytha]

Issue 1

On the rape issue. I think applying for a rape situation is really rather redundant. I don't think many people wake up one day and think "I'm going to roleplay a rape, today". Nor do I think that our MUD should be one where characters (male or female) should be afraid of being attacked sexually by another character. So I think the only sensible way to approach this is with Dalvyn's suggestion. Let any person who is uncomfortable with a sex-based RP be given the right to "osay Can we stop this, if that's okay? I don't feel comfortable with this". The person who is asked to stop should not feel victimised there. They were just pushing the limits of something and as long as they listen to the OOC NO, everyone can continue to be friends and RP together. Its when the OOC NO is ignored, that the rules should come into play.

Maybe in that case, a use of the "punish" command and an OOC warning.
If the player involved continues to ignore another OOC NO request, perhaps a strike. If the player a third time ignores another OOC NO request (thereby bringing something similar to sexual harrasment), then I say ban them.

To sum up that part: allow most sexual encounters, but tie in a OOC NO clause as outlined above.

Issue 2

Now, I'm also going to raise an issue which isn't here at present... about applying for "alternative lifestyle" roleplay. Please, this isn't meant to start a debate about the morality of the issue. If people want a debate about that, there's lots of forums out there to do that on.

If someone doesn't apply for same-sex relationships, should they be punished? As far as I see it, same-sex relationships are common nowdays, were common in medieval times and are (though they are not published so much) most likely equally common in D&D/FR. Now, since we're looking at the rules, and since it's obvious that the rules of sex in the MUD are being looked at again, I'd just like to ask a few questions:

1. Is the application thing for "alternative lifestyles" just a heads-up to the imms, or is there actually a chance it could be rejected?

2. If it is just a heads-up to the imms, do we really need it? Surely it is just extra effort, to monitor something that probably doesn't need to be monitored.

3. Why would "alternative lifestyles" need to tell the admin staff that they understand the PG-13 rating, when "normal" lifestyles don't? This isn't just politically correct moaning, by the way. But if we're ready to even consider making rape present in the MUD (which I understand nobody is suggesting, but there is finally a discussion about it, which can only be good), then I think any lesser issues of controversy also need to be looked at.

Thanks for your time!

~Ol

[Mask]

Hi there,

Thanks for putting this together, Lathander. Is it possible to discuss some of the policies which are indirectly referenced? I also think that alot of the punishments some quite harsh for 'first time offences'.

With regard to strikes - do they work, ie, serve a useful purpose? Should they automatically expire after a certain time period?

Cheating:
1 OOC arranging to transfer coins/eq (intent uncompleted) Punish and Verbal Warning
2 Asking for OOC or IC help in solving riddle-type quests Strike

Why is there a problem with requesting IC help? And how would we police OOC requests for help ie, over IM or email?

2 Use of scripts/bots/triggers for any purpose Strike and removal of PC gains from the script
2 Evading limits set by builders (practicing skills in an un-IC manner) Reduction of skill to zero and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (aid/stun/repeat to gain favor/xp) Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 Evading limits set by builders (purchasing or owning too many "special" items) Deletion of the PC and a Strike

The last two seem extremely harsh? How can 'owning' too many special items be a bad thing? What if they were attained through IC trade?

2 Evading limits set by builders (shoving mobs aside to avoid programs) Deletion of the PC and a Strike

Again, this seems very harsh. Shoving someone out of the way to get past them seems to be a reasonable IC response in some situations.

2 Getting multiple rewards for repeatedly finishing the same quest Deletion of the PC and a Strike
2 OOC transferring coins/eq (intent completed) Deletion of 1 PC and a Strike

Harassment:
3 Non-profane harrassment of Player Council/Imms Strike
3 Profane harrassment of Player Council/Imms Strike, possible Deletion or Ban
3 Choosing a profane name for a PC Deletion and possible Ban
3 Excess OOC profanity Account Destruction and Ban
3 Any threat to cause direct harm to the game (hack, spam, etc) Account Destruction and Ban

What is the definition of harassment of player council/imms? Why does the use of profanity make a difference? I would suggest that a suitable response to unacceptable OOC behaviour such as someone abusing any player (whether imm, player council or a mortal) should be verbal warning. If they do not cease, desist and apologise, then they are given a 24 hour or 1 week ban which would expire automatically.

Minions:
1 Minions doing things outside of their abilities Punish or Other, dependant on the specific action
3 Killing a minion w/no rp Strike

I would broaden the definition of bad minion RP to something like 'Bad IC behaviour', meaning doing things like riding your donkey into the altar of a temple etc.

Is killing a minion without RP the same as player-killing without RP? What about stealing from a minion?

Multiplay:
2 PCs in the same account aiding each other (materially, non-materially, corpse retrieval, etc.) Deletion of 1 PC and a Strike
2 Two or more players sharing the same PC Account Destruction
2 Owning more than one account Account Destruction (Leave 1) and Strike

Need to clarify the second one above somewhat.

Pkill:
3 Pkill (even with rp) in the newbie temples Strike
3 Pkill without sufficient rp Strike

Policy:
1 Entering a PC storeroom uninvited without taking anything Punish and Verbal Warning
2 Players/accounts logging in from a school IP without prior approval Ban the school IP
3 Looting a PC storeroom Strike, possible Deletion

Why is entering a store room uninvited a punishable offence? How would a player know before hand? What is the school IP one about?

RP:
1 RP of a special nature that has not been approved through the application process Punish and told to cease the activity
1 Purposely avoiding roleplay Punish or Other, dependant on the specific action
1 RP not in keeping with alignment (no approved app for change) Punish and Verbal Warning
1 Ruining an imm-run RP Helled for remainder of the rp and Punish
2 RP not in keeping with alignment, CN acting evil (no approved app for change) Alignment change and Strike
3 Avoiding rp after taking an item from a PC corpse Strike
3 Stealing from a link-dead PC Reduction of skill to zero and a Strike
3 Using the newbie temples to escape rp consequences Ban (one-month)

RPing outside alignment is in twice above - not sure I understand the difference? Also does avoiding RP after taking something from a corpse also covering stealing from a living PC? I don't understand how the newbie temples could be used to escape RP consequences or why the punishment would be a ban?

Sex:
1 IC discussions of rape Punish and Verbal Warning
1 Unacceptable (but not excessive) sexual rp Punish and Verbal Warning
3 Overt IC sexual behavior or profanity Strike

These are obviously a bit of a pandora's box, judging by the number of responses. I don't want to be in a position where I or someone else has to subjectively judge whether a particular act is 'a bridge too far' or not. One thing I would say is, do we really need to require applications for 'alternative lifestyles'?

M

[Japcil]

On note of school IP. I believe his backing of this is that because all school computers share a IP this makes it harder to police multiplaying two accounts logging on the same computer at the same time. For all we know, you are one person with two accounts. Not two people across campus with seperate computers.

[Lathander]

There are some great opinions here, please keep them coming. I'll respond to all the responses in a couple of days when I can sit down and be thorough. There is a reason for the "school IP" thing and once I take the time to spell it out, it won't seem so weird.

As for the rape thing, I'll post more later; however, I want to clear up that the only thing under discussion here is the DISCUSSION of rape IC. FK does not condone rape rp. As for the specifics of the previous case (there WAS no app by the way), this is not the forum for that discussion. It is not my intent to bring up uncomfortable feelings regarding past rp but to put forth a starting point to make policy for the future.

As was stated in the header of my original post, none of this is yet set in stone and we are more than willing to revise punishments.

Please don't let the list make you afraid to play (as someone stated). If the list seems daunting or long, please remember it was at LEAST twice as long when I started and many of the infractions were repeat offenses (at least two were committed 10 times by different players over the years). The GOAL here is to arrive at something as fair as possible so we can all enjoy FK under the same rules.

KEEP THE IDEAS COMING!

[Mariela]

You know. I had this big long thing written up, and I figured out what my problem is.

These are the punishment framework if you are found "Guilty", yes?
So it is implied that you are guilty when these are held against you. It does not define the investigation process or even if there is one.

That is what makes me nervous as Enaria up there. It is such a basic framework that it sounds that you can get slapped on the wrists and shackled for even "innocent" breaking of the rules.

I know I personally have innocently broken at least three of the rules above in my stay among the Forgotten Kingdoms. All the times, it was explained and I attempted to correct the mistake after that point on. I have never been told how successful I have been at keeping my nose clean, so I can only assume that I have been? I dunno.

Some of it is just simple common sense. This is a game that is supposed to be fun for all. It is not fun if you are cheating to "win". So to speak. There is a fine line.

What was my point.. oh yes. Great framework, but investigation process? Is there one?

[Dalvyn]

2 Evading limits set by builders (shoving mobs aside to avoid programs) Deletion of the PC and a Strike

Again, this seems very harsh. Shoving someone out of the way to get past them seems to be a reasonable IC response in some situations.

In some situations, yes. In other situations, no.

If you are not a member of a guild, shoving aside the guard at the entrance so you can enter the guild and train with the mobs inside is an OOC offense and thus punishable, because the character is cheating and taking advantage of the fact that the mobs inside won't react to their shoving of the guard outside. That is the kind of OOC shoving that this rule addresses. Though I agree that deletion is too harsh.

(And before you tell me to add intercept_prog train/sell/buy on the mobs inside so they only deal with guild members, I'll point out that I might want to let guild members escort non-members in so they can benefit from the trainers and shops, so I can't do that).

3. Why would "alternative lifestyles" need to tell the admin staff that they understand the PG-13 rating, when "normal" lifestyles don't? This isn't just politically correct moaning, by the way. But if we're ready to even consider making rape present in the MUD (which I understand nobody is suggesting, but there is finally a discussion about it, which can only be good), then I think any lesser issues of controversy also need to be looked at.

All alternative-lifestyle applications are automatically accepted. That's been the "rule of thumb" for hmmm nearly a year now I think? I am not too sure why we still require them though.

[Maybel]

Mask asked about what Lathander wrote:

Cheating:
1 OOC arranging to transfer coins/eq (intent uncompleted) Punish and Verbal Warning
2 Asking for OOC or IC help in solving riddle-type quests Strike

[quote}Why is there a problem with requesting IC help? And how would we police OOC requests for help ie, over IM or email? [/quote]

I think he might have meant "Asking OOC for IC help in solving riddle-type quest"

if not... then I apologies ... but that is how i took it