Help PK

LaekaLaeka HoustonMember Posts: 8
edited June 2 in Fighting and Combat
From what Jeremy posted in the other thread, HELP PK needs to be updated and changed to reflect the current views of the adminstration because as of right now, those that are new to Imperian, new to PK in Imperian or whatever are going by those rules/guidelines outlined in that scroll and they are apparently no longer valid. 

Please update the scroll. 
«13

Comments

  • GjarrusGjarrus Member Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    Some notes I would like to see included:

    Shards - Major falls are open pk zones, and harvesting any shard anywhere is open pk

    Event PK versus General PK - Event-based open PK (shardfalls, raids, obelisks) is safe from retribution outside of the event. General open PK (champion, mono holding, assassin contracts, bounties, 'pk right') is not safe from retribution if you opt to attack the person. The former overrides the latter.

    Death - Only the True Death counts unless your attacker feels nice.

    Fleeing - You need to be out of combat for some time before the combat event is over, meaning you don't suddenly become immune to PK because you left a shardfall area after harvesting.

    Otherwise, I don't really see anything else that needs to be in.
  • WyllWyll Member Posts: 124 ✭✭✭
    The whole help file needs to be updated, but.. HELP SHARDS outlines the shard PK rules. HELP RAIDING outlines raiding PK rules. HELP BOUNTIES did outline what I thought were the bounty rules, but now it needs updating if you are allowed to retaliate on someone fufilling a bounty on you.

    So then where does that end?

    Laeka fulfills a bounty on Wyll -> Wyll finds Laeka and retaliates -> Laeka finds Wyll to retaliate for the retaliation -> Well, F it, Wyll wants more retaliation - > infinity.

    And now if we are allowed to retaliate for someone fufilling a bounty on us, you need to make it so that bounties can't be fufilled during raids. Because if you are defending your city from raiders and there is a bounty out for them from your org, they now have an excuse to come after you after the raid has ended on that technicality.

    @Gjarrus - On the topic of fleeing, if someone leaves a shard area, they are bowing out of that conflict because they no longer want to be part of it. Chasing after them well outside of the active shardfall area to kill them is ridiculous. You're fighting over the shards, that's the premise. When they leave the area, they are no longer a threat to those shards you want. Where is the RP reason for chasing them out of the area to kill them? We need RP reasons to kill in this game. It has been said over and over again.


    Mereis
  • AodanAodan Member Posts: 44 ✭✭
    Wyll said:
    The whole help file needs to be updated, but.. HELP SHARDS outlines the shard PK rules. HELP RAIDING outlines raiding PK rules. HELP BOUNTIES did outline what I thought were the bounty rules, but now it needs updating if you are allowed to retaliate on someone fufilling a bounty on you.

    So then where does that end?

    Laeka fulfills a bounty on Wyll -> Wyll finds Laeka and retaliates -> Laeka finds Wyll to retaliate for the retaliation -> Well, F it, Wyll wants more retaliation - > infinity.

    And now if we are allowed to retaliate for someone fufilling a bounty on us, you need to make it so that bounties can't be fufilled during raids. Because if you are defending your city from raiders and there is a bounty out for them from your org, they now have an excuse to come after you after the raid has ended on that technicality.

    @Gjarrus - On the topic of fleeing, if someone leaves a shard area, they are bowing out of that conflict because they no longer want to be part of it. Chasing after them well outside of the active shardfall area to kill them is ridiculous. You're fighting over the shards, that's the premise. When they leave the area, they are no longer a threat to those shards you want. Where is the RP reason for chasing them out of the area to kill them? We need RP reasons to kill in this game. It has been said over and over again.


    the fulfilling the bounty during a raid should be common sense but I believe @Gjarrus covered that with:

    Gjarrus said:

    Event PK versus General PK - Event-based open PK (shardfalls, raids, obelisks) is safe from retribution outside of the event. General open PK (champion, mono holding, assassin contracts, bounties, 'pk right') is not safe from retribution if you opt to attack the person. The former overrides the latter.

    if you are defending and happen to claim a bounty, lucky you, you get some money free with no consequences.

    and the shardfall thing is basically if you have even 1 shard, it takes a good bit, even after fleeing the scene from harvesting said 1 shard, before they don't fall from your inventory when you die. until then, its fair game to kill you and claim even just 1 shard. I personally don't do that, others will. you can offer to give up any harvested shards if you truly want to bow out, but the whole point of a shardfall is to pk again, not, hope no one shows up while I harvest. So unless I am totally reading what you are saying wrong(which may be the case) if you have shards on your person, harvested from the recent shardfall you are fair game for the harvested shards, if you are just passing through the area and haven't harvested a single shard, you are not fair game.
    Alvetta
  • WyllWyll Member Posts: 124 ✭✭✭
    Aodan said:
    Wyll said:
    The whole help file needs to be updated, but.. HELP SHARDS outlines the shard PK rules. HELP RAIDING outlines raiding PK rules. HELP BOUNTIES did outline what I thought were the bounty rules, but now it needs updating if you are allowed to retaliate on someone fufilling a bounty on you.

    So then where does that end?

    Laeka fulfills a bounty on Wyll -> Wyll finds Laeka and retaliates -> Laeka finds Wyll to retaliate for the retaliation -> Well, F it, Wyll wants more retaliation - > infinity.

    And now if we are allowed to retaliate for someone fufilling a bounty on us, you need to make it so that bounties can't be fufilled during raids. Because if you are defending your city from raiders and there is a bounty out for them from your org, they now have an excuse to come after you after the raid has ended on that technicality.

    @Gjarrus - On the topic of fleeing, if someone leaves a shard area, they are bowing out of that conflict because they no longer want to be part of it. Chasing after them well outside of the active shardfall area to kill them is ridiculous. You're fighting over the shards, that's the premise. When they leave the area, they are no longer a threat to those shards you want. Where is the RP reason for chasing them out of the area to kill them? We need RP reasons to kill in this game. It has been said over and over again.


    the fulfilling the bounty during a raid should be common sense but I believe @Gjarrus covered that with:

    Gjarrus said:

    Event PK versus General PK - Event-based open PK (shardfalls, raids, obelisks) is safe from retribution outside of the event. General open PK (champion, mono holding, assassin contracts, bounties, 'pk right') is not safe from retribution if you opt to attack the person. The former overrides the latter.

    if you are defending and happen to claim a bounty, lucky you, you get some money free with no consequences.

    and the shardfall thing is basically if you have even 1 shard, it takes a good bit, even after fleeing the scene from harvesting said 1 shard, before they don't fall from your inventory when you die. until then, its fair game to kill you and claim even just 1 shard. I personally don't do that, others will. you can offer to give up any harvested shards if you truly want to bow out, but the whole point of a shardfall is to pk again, not, hope no one shows up while I harvest. So unless I am totally reading what you are saying wrong(which may be the case) if you have shards on your person, harvested from the recent shardfall you are fair game for the harvested shards, if you are just passing through the area and haven't harvested a single shard, you are not fair game.

    You underestimate how much players lack common sense, if you truly believe someone won't use that 'someone fulfilled a bounty on me' excuse to retaliate. Rules are put into place constantly in games and in life because someone does something stupid that should have been 'common sense'.

    Regarding shardfalls, I'm not talking about people harvesting. A shardfall happened in Caanae yesterday, people were AFK at the springs. They're in an active shardfall area, they are technically open to PK having harvested no shards. People have been attacked for being in an area with a SINGLE shard while not even harvesting the single shard.

    The point goes back to greifing anyhow, if someone is bowing out of conflict, i.e. leaving an active shardfall area, or avoiding harvesting the single shard in an area, and you go after them because of whatever invisible combat timer you have going on in your head, you are griefing. They have removed themselves from that conflict and or avoiding it by refusing to harvest the single shard, and you go after them, that's dumb.

    Speaking of 'being out of combat for some time' what is this invisible time everyone keeps talking about? Give us a concrete number so the rules are followed by everyone in the same way. What is 'some time' to me may differ from 'some time' to another person. Code it in if you have to because we're moving into subjective territory now.
    Mereis
  • GjarrusGjarrus Member Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    edited June 2
    I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you leave a shardfall area, and I know you were harvesting, I will chase you. The RP reason is my council needs the shards, and I don't want some stinking sandrat having them. The rules also support it.

    E: The timer is in reference to something Jeremy himself said in the big ol post just recently. I just think 15m is probably too long, which is the number he gave as an example.
    AodanMereis
  • WyllWyll Member Posts: 124 ✭✭✭
    Gjarrus said:
    I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If you leave a shardfall area, and I know you were harvesting, I will chase you. The RP reason is my council needs the shards, and I don't want some stinking sandrat having them. The rules also support it.

    E: The timer is in reference to something Jeremy himself said in the big ol post just recently. I just think 15m is probably too long, which is the number he gave as an example.
    This is a copy and paste of the rules exactly:

    Note: Players are open to PK from other players while in areas with an active Shardfall in them.

    If that's not the case, then rewrite the help file so that it is clear. It makes no mention of if you were harvesting or not. You can simply kill a player for being in the area.

    If you want to read it for yourself in its entirety, then do HELP SHARDS.
  • GjarrusGjarrus Member Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    Which is why I wanted a note of the standing rules as they are, plus it's probably a good idea to have at least a mention of shard PK rules in HELP PK. Chasing out of area was iffier before the shard update, but with the drop on death, you're still game for up to 10m from your last harvest now (from the way I understand it).
    Aodan
  • EoghanEoghan Member, Immortal Posts: 704 mod
    The timer mentioned by Jeremy is 1) A loose time frame and 2) Applies to normal PK, not shard PK.

    For shardfalls, our standing rule has been: If someone leaves the area, but has been coming back and is staging to do so again, you can kill them. If they leave and are done, they're done.

    Jeremy may come in and contradict this later.
    Like what we're doing? Why not take a second to vote? Vote for Imperian at http://www.imperian.com/vote
    Wyll
  • LartusLartus Member Posts: 287 ✭✭✭
    What? You want my Pk xp? You'll never get it!

    Lartus has been slain by a mob.
  • SeptusSeptus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 701 ✭✭✭✭

    Chasing out of the shardfall seems like common sense to me. If someone ducks out mid fight/right after harvesting chasing seems like a no brainer. If you're chasing them half way across the map you're probably being excessive. Call me a jerk (you'd be right) but if someone is afk in a shardfall area they can take it as a lesson for why afking in public areas is bad for their health.

    I personally don't think you should be able to retaliate from someone defending their city - this is an instance you are instigating conflict and the city defenders are protecting their interests. The onus should be on the aggressor to suck it up and take their lumps, speaking as a former prolific city troller. City defence is a great way to draw people into pk, that ceases to be the case if some competent pker is just going to curbstomp you when you go to bash later because they didn't like how things turned out. To draw a comparrison, this is like me going and jumping someone then because they hit back I go jump them again when they get back to life. It is possible I'm misunderstanding the stance on this, but those are my thoughts on it.

    GjarrusAodanMereis
  • TheophilusTheophilus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 673 ✭✭✭✭
    Septus said:

    Chasing out of the shardfall seems like common sense to me. If someone ducks out mid fight/right after harvesting chasing seems like a no brainer. If you're chasing them half way across the map you're probably being excessive. Call me a jerk (you'd be right) but if someone is afk in a shardfall area they can take it as a lesson for why afking in public areas is bad for their health.

    I personally don't think you should be able to retaliate from someone defending their city - this is an instance you are instigating conflict and the city defenders are protecting their interests. The onus should be on the aggressor to suck it up and take their lumps, speaking as a former prolific city troller. City defence is a great way to draw people into pk, that ceases to be the case if some competent pker is just going to curbstomp you when you go to bash later because they didn't like how things turned out. To draw a comparrison, this is like me going and jumping someone then because they hit back I go jump them again when they get back to life. It is possible I'm misunderstanding the stance on this, but those are my thoughts on it.

    If I come into a city to collect a bounty and a friend of the one bountied attacks me, I think that gives me full right to attack them. If they don't want to be attacked, they should just stay out of it.. Same as protecting someone at a monolith. Raid defense is one thing, but collecting a bounty is another.
    AodanWyll
  • GjarrusGjarrus Member Posts: 290 ✭✭✭
    In that case, I'd say you were 'raiding' by trespassing. You can deal with them if they defend, but you can't go hunting them down afterward. Monolith is out in the open so it's different, or if say the bounty was hunting and the same happened then you could deal with the helper later if you wanted.
    WyllTheophilusSeptus
  • TheophilusTheophilus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 673 ✭✭✭✭
    That's fair.
  • SeptusSeptus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 701 ✭✭✭✭
    Right, the hunting down later for what is essentially city defence is where my issue with it comes in.
    Wyll
  • AnetteAnette Member Posts: 650 ✭✭✭
    edited June 3
    Lartus said:
    What? You want my Pk xp? You'll never get it!

    Lartus has been slain by a mob.
    You joke but I had Anette literally kill herself once when someone wanted to stab her up to get PK XP.

    One thing that never sat well with me is the whole idea that basically even the slightest of indication you were doing something "PK ish" means people can chase you down for it somewhat relentlessly, and I'm speaking from experience there.  If there isn't a way to ease yourself in it and you have to jump in "in the deep end" then frankly, that just ends up putting a lot of people off, I think.

    I know it does me, anyways.
    image
    Wyll
  • TheophilusTheophilus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 673 ✭✭✭✭
    Let's say during city defense someone tells me, "You're pathetic. You're garbage. You suck," but maybe not in those terms. Can I hunt them after for THAT reason?
    Wyll
  • ZerinZerin Member Posts: 41 ✭✭✭
    I have a question too. I remember a while back @Theophilus came to collect a bounty on me. Cyr defended me - Theo died. Theo then said "that's one death for everytime someone defends you", because "it's just a bounty". I feel like this is also excessive. PK rights on Cyr, yes... But another death each time I did not die? Thoughts?
    Wyll
  • AnetteAnette Member Posts: 650 ✭✭✭
    Zerin said:
    I have a question too. I remember a while back @Theophilus came to collect a bounty on me. Cyr defended me - Theo died. Theo then said "that's one death for everytime someone defends you", because "it's just a bounty". I feel like this is also excessive. PK rights on Cyr, yes... But another death each time I did not die? Thoughts?
    I'd certainly consider it excessive.
    image
  • TysandrTysandr Member Posts: 2
    edited June 3
    I didn't think it'd accrue like that.

    Also, Septus, what happened to your icon D:
  • SeptusSeptus Member, Beta Testers Posts: 701 ✭✭✭✭
    What icon? (Also that question doesn't matter because I didn't change anything so the answer is going to be "I have no idea").
  • WyllWyll Member Posts: 124 ✭✭✭
    Oystir said:

    All an issue does is make the person & their friends laugh, lets them know they've gotten to you, removes any alternative options YOU have (calling on other friends or pulling some sneak jumping later), and considering the absence of genuine harassment of most of these issues, will be shrugged off, justly, by the administration who are exclusively policing for toxic players, not just assholes. Being an **** isn't an issueable offense.
    I'm not sure what game you're playing, but the admins have never shrugged off an issue in my experience. They've always handled it and while I don't agree with the way they handle some issues, they've never shrugged off an issue, whether PK related or otherwise. That is what they are there for, to step in when another player isn't following the rules that they set.

    While true, you can't issue someone for being an ****, you can issue them for breaking rules and if you let them get on with it and the next time they do it to another player who gets on it with, it becomes  a pattern behavior where they think they can get away with it.

    Have you tried resolving problems with some of these people in game? They're not reachable in a way that is productive to solving the problem. If you ask them why they are doing x, y, or z, they always reply with their own reasoning(how they see the rules). Read some of the replies in here. I'm not even going to name and shame because I'll be called out for a personal attack. Some of them don't even reply or try to resolve the problem!

    If they sit there and laugh with their friends over and issue, that's fine. They're toxic. They know they're toxic. They're also griefers, but they're also the ones who sit there and complain about the lack of a playerbase while not doing any self reflecting.

    The bigger point of this thread is that some PK rules aren't very clear(read everyone's opinion on it). Because clearly some people's interpretation of a help file are different than others. I've been told by Jeremy that they can't have specific rules to outline every situation in a game like this and that issues are handled on a case by case basis for this reason.

    At the end of the day, we all have opinions on certain rules and aspects of PK(the ones that aren't specific), but the final say in all of that is going to be the admins. They can't have the final say or have a situation brought to their attenton if you don't use the system(issues) that is made for that reason.
    Mereis
  • OwynOwyn USMember Posts: 38 ✭✭✭
    @Wyll I can't even remember the  last time someone who issued me for a PK offense ever tried to resolve the issue ICly first. I've also never lost a PK issue; there's a reason. @Oystir pretty much hit the nail on the head. A lot of "non-coms" like to talk smack IC like they are; this will, rightfully so, result in their death.
    MyrcellaWyllMereisAodan
  • OystirOystir Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    edited June 4
    I'm not suggesting the administration don't take issues seriously, only that for a large majority of issues filed about PK, the appropriate administrative response is to say 'stop that' which they do, which could have been done without the issue if a person had allowed themselves the option to let it go before escalating things to the administration.

    Issues have not been being used appropriately in the majority of the filings in my awareness, especially lately. People are attempting to use it as a tool to humble and assert power over people who have more PK ability than them instead of as a tool to combat actual harassment. I don't take them seriously when they're used like that either and I think I'm reasonably sympathetic to these situations.

    I don't want to say don't issue if you feel harassed; please do. I'm just saying if you let go of a little bit of pride you'll probably be able to deal with unpleasant people better than Jeremy's intervention can. And if you feel like you're being griefed, then maybe you'd be better off changing your expectations about PK and accepting a few deaths than you would trying to alter somebody else's behavior. 
     You say, "This is much harder than just being a normal person."
    Aodan
  • OystirOystir Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    I also hope to suggest that by going into PK anticipating a death or two, even if they're stupid reasons, you'll be perfectly set up to both learn the PK rules as they have mutated and maturely cope with any grey area that you experience without making things fun for a troll. 
     You say, "This is much harder than just being a normal person."
    Aodan
  • WyllWyll Member Posts: 124 ✭✭✭
    @Oystir and @Owyn

    If you have a PK reason, as in an actual RP reason, then by all means do all the killing for whatever you see fit. If they 'talked smack', then kill them, that's your decision and you'll win if they issue you, because admin has time and time again said that is a valid reason. And I already know of two people in this thread who kill people for 'talking smack', but they only go after people who they can easily kill, aka non coms, aka people who are freshly out of level 30 and are no longer newbies. But the rules allow it, so by all means, do it.

    I'm not arguing not to kill if you have a reason. I'm also not arguing that you shouldn't expect to be killed if you slide in PK related play.

    And I already outlined what I thought the bigger point of this thread is, so I won't repeat it.
  • KrysalissKrysaliss Member Posts: 213 ✭✭✭
    Speaking as someone who didn't PK at all for the first 5 or so years I played Imperian, it's really not that hard to avoid being PK'd by 99% of the players. I smacked talked all the time, I ran fast and also died occasionally. Sometimes I had big, scary people defend me. I earned most of the deaths I received. 

    I've only ever had to legitimately issue one person for excessive PK harassment. They killed me over and over again for a month, had me snubbed, continually talked smack IG via assorted communication channels I couldn't block, and gave me no reason as to why they were targeting me. That's actual harassment. And that was back when dying actually cost you significant time because you lost experience. 

    The rules did need some clarification. I think it would also be an excellent idea for people to wait a day before filing an issue. A lot of the ones I've seen come up seem to be rage in the heat of the moment.  

    It'd also be stellar if boosts to non-PK stuff didn't require participation in conflict generation mechanisms to acquire them - harvest boosts from shards, for example. Give non-PKers a way to contribute without becoming targets or beggars. 
  • AnetteAnette Member Posts: 650 ✭✭✭
    edited June 4
    Oystir said:

    And griefing? It's a form of harassment. 1-2 deaths with relatively tentative justification is not harassment, especially when you engage the person. 1-2 deaths with NO justification is barely issue-worthy unless the killer is making it a pattern of behavior. Your best recourse if you've been killed is to run to a bigger, badder dog in-character or to let it go.

    All an issue does is make the person & their friends laugh, lets them know they've gotten to you, removes any alternative options YOU have (calling on other friends or pulling some sneak jumping later), and considering the absence of genuine harassment of most of these issues, will be shrugged off, justly, by the administration who are exclusively policing for toxic players, not just assholes. Being an **** isn't an issueable offense.
    As a general rule of thumb, if you don't have a measurable loss other than the time to come back after you died, and it doesn't happen often, the admin won't care unless there's some sort of extenuating circumstance.

    But speaking as someone whose dealt with genuine harassment in game:

    A: the people who get like two tells ever and maybe a death and call it harassment are themselves annoying because the admin spend the time they should be dealing with actual harassment.  Losing an argument/fight/ingame election is not "harassment"

    B: blowing off stuff as "not bad enough for actual harassment" on the forums/channels/etc usually only empowers genuine bad actors when someone is being harassed

    C: in all of my years of playing I've only dealt with three (3) people like that, so its not an endemic problem, but it exists.

    If you can't or don't want to deal with it yourself, that's what the administration is there for and it's a function of their job.  I can't speak for Jeremy et al, but in their place, I know I'd rather want to hear from a player who is in a bad place however "not as bad" the situation is, and have a chance to do something for them, then have them sod off or crumble or end up getting the MUD in hot PR water by going on about it on TMS or similar, not to mention all manner of less pleasant outcomes.
    image
    WyllOystir
  • OystirOystir Member Posts: 309 ✭✭✭
    Yeah, as I said before I absolutely don't want to discourage anyone from contacting the administration if you feel attacked or harassed. Please do. Forums or issues or messages; do it. Make sure you're enjoying Imperian. 

    I just think it's important to clarify to somebody like @Wyll, who seems very much the type to expect rules to be followed to the letter, that that expectation is one that makes PK frustrating. Updating HELP PK is a worthwhile endeavor as long as it is done while also emphasizing that you're probably going to die a couple of arguably illegal deaths if you engage in PK or with a PKer), that even the defined rules are going to be pushed by multiple people, and that PK is supposed to be fun, and if you're not having fun you can opt-out without administrative intervention at literally any point provided you're willing to die to somebody you don't like. 

    I'm not trying to enable poor behavior or create an atmosphere where rule-breaking is normalized - especially when a certain somebody is walking around killing people just because they're bored (lets all stop and stare @ them rn). Only instead hoping to encourage the combat mindset where you don't have to feel victimized or angry over a death or two, where you don't throw around profanity or accusations of harassment that are simply not the case, and where you are able to navigate a fun and largely consequence-free aspect of the game with full control over your actions, reactions and options.
     You say, "This is much harder than just being a normal person."
    Anette
  • AnetteAnette Member Posts: 650 ✭✭✭
    edited June 4
    Oystir said:
    Yeah, as I said before I absolutely don't want to discourage anyone from contacting the administration if you feel attacked or harassed. Please do. Forums or issues or messages; do it. Make sure you're enjoying Imperian. 

    I just think it's important to clarify to somebody like @Wyll, who seems very much the type to expect rules to be followed to the letter, that that expectation is one that makes PK frustrating. Updating HELP PK is a worthwhile endeavor as long as it is done while also emphasizing that you're probably going to die a couple of arguably illegal deaths if you engage in PK or with a PKer), that even the defined rules are going to be pushed by multiple people, and that PK is supposed to be fun, and if you're not having fun you can opt-out without administrative intervention at literally any point provided you're willing to die to somebody you don't like. 

    I'm not trying to enable poor behavior or create an atmosphere where rule-breaking is normalized - especially when a certain somebody is walking around killing people just because they're bored (lets all stop and stare @ them rn). Only instead hoping to encourage the combat mindset where you don't have to feel victimized or angry over a death or two, where you don't throw around profanity or accusations of harassment that are simply not the case, and where you are able to navigate a fun and largely consequence-free aspect of the game with full control over your actions, reactions and options.
    Yes, I do think there is value in updating the rules and didn't mean to suggest otherwise.  Let me piggy-back on your own commentary though: there will always be a "grey area", no matter how "rules lawyer-y" we get with the writing of HELP PK, and so long as there is that grey area, I think I would rather err on the side of caution and say "if this is bothering you, well, that's what the admin are for"

    At the same time, I think we can both agree there's people who don't use the issues system because they're upset per se, or put off, or feeling harassed.  There's a type of person who use the issue system as a way to try to "get back" at the person who killed them.  I think we both can agree that this should be discouraged, but I'm not sure we can really do that with something in HELP PK.  You don't really stop abusive people by asking them not to be abusive.

    And on yet another hand (I guess I have three now?) there have been instances where people have felt they were in the right, by following stated rules or the apparent "status quo" that forms our de facto ruleset, only to get burnt.  Those cases are worth minimizing by having some greater clarity in the existing rules.
    image
    OystirWyll
«13
Sign In or Register to comment.