I still don't think he should've been banned in the first place but after having been shown more context, I don't want him to get unbanned early as there was a blatant lie in the ban appeal to push a false narrative.
I would love to see where's that context coming from, since there is nothing in the ban appeal. Shouldn't it only be keep in public instead of privately sneaking something that the ban person is not even aware of? kinda want to know.
Banning for using sacks? What? And using the vaguest rule the tos has no less? I don't care if someone dies to a sacking if it happened once. 10% at worst isn't that big of a deal. Is it kind of a dick move to sack players at 4th job? Yeah it is kinda. But a ban is far beyond what the response should be. We have a community blacklist for a reason. Its to discuss the true black sheep's of the community and even sometimes hash out problems players have with one another. If this was a serial sacking focusing one or two specific players i could see this being more reasonable to ban. But one frigging time? Thats a terrible precedent to set if this is upheld.
This is an unbelievably bad take. You actually do a disservice to your argument to use sexual harassment to compare two things that are diametrically different from one another in terms of actual real world severity.
In regards to my upcoming comment, I am separating two issues - one is on the rules of sacking and the other is in relation to OP’s ban appeal. Personally, I agree that the rules on sacking requires more clarity as it is somewhat quite vague at the moment. However, we should not jump to conclusions so quickly as to say who is right or wrong - whether OP or the “deceased” LOL is innocent. We do not have any evidence to prove that the aforementioned allegations are true. Hence, I believe that it is better to wait for the truth i.e. confirmation/statements from the GMs or evidence from the relevant parties, either OP or the ones who reported OP; than to support any side. p/s: I’m not siding anyone here as I do not have any information regarding the truth in relation to the issue/ban above. However, I’m definitely up for a clarification and clarity as to what suffices a ban in regards to the action “sacking”
This was not meant to be a judging/supporting thread, even though i started this because i got banned i'm just asking for clarification regarding when and where it is ok / baneable to use a mosnter sack. As for my ban, at this point i don't really mind whatever happens with it since by this time i already served half of it so nevermind, but kinda want this to be on the rules so people can avoid being banned for such things like this.
Don’t worry! I did not say that it is a “judging thread” and I support your move in wanting to know more or get clarification in regards to “sacking”. Just take my comment as a purpose to serve as a reminder
inb4 people abuse self-sack to claim they got sacked and get original mapowner banned and GMs have to check logs to see if its actually true PepeLaugh
This is something I thought about, especially with GMs say sacking in town is possibly bannable. If there are no logs in regards to summoning sacks, they they would need to configure the database and source code to keep track of this IF they come to the consensus that sacking players = bannable outright. I don't know if that's worth anyone's time, it would make more sense to make repetitive targetting with sacks a bannable offense and leave it at that.
My hot take: Like fame (which can be negative), sacks exist in the game. As long as its not repeated snd targering a specific player, there is no reason to think it should be bannable. There is nothing about using a sack that would indicate its being abused. If youre worried about it, afk somewhere safe. If staff are going to ban for sacking players, than most everyone here deserves a ban and they should just remove them from the game to save everyone the headache in the first place. Besides using the boss sack for the boss quests i find very little use for any of the sacks besides killing people.
Sacking should not be bannable. If you afk in a sack-able spot, you should be prepared to be sacked. Neither should be using offensive language or mass defames, but that's another discussion.
I think it's pretty clear that there's a line between acceptable sacking and harassment via sacking. The problem is where people draw this said line because it varies person to person. I have my doubts that sacks were made in the game so that people use it to kill each other off whenever they feel like it. Personally, I think if you want to sack people, you should keep it to just friends or people you're at least acquainted with, like Gert sacking Evan. When you randomly sack people you don't even know, you're kind of giving them a chance to react however they want because truth be told, being AFK doesn't really justify why someone needs to get sacked... being AFK only means that the AFK players are vulnerable. So when someone makes the "you shouldn't be AFK there" argument, it's kind of like saying letting yourself become vulnerable justifies some random you don't even know to come and sack you whenever they please. And if vulnerability is the only criteria for justifying these kinds of inherently negative actions (because sacking is meant to hinder progress by killing players), then what's to stop people from saying that scamming or hacking an account shouldn't be bannable if someone made themselves vulnerable by setting a crappy password or being plain gullible? This question is merely to incite a response that can explain the moral difference between these mentioned transgressions because blaming AFKing (and therefore, blaming the fact that the individual allowed themself to be vulnerable) alone simply will not work. After all, why blame the victim for sacking cases when clearly victims of other scenarios aren't blamed for their misfortunes even in cases where they pretty much asked for it. Why is figuring this out important? Because you can't create clear rules/laws if you do not have some understanding of ethics and morality to maintain logical consistency when making rules. As far as I'm concerned, most of these posts just over-generalize sacking into one context and make blanket statements that can't really be applied in varying situations.
Preaching to the choir. Theres still bits of the TnC that havent been updated despite being told it would be done when I was staff. Trust me, I am always down for more clear and explicit rules.
I'm with you 100% on that. I just wanted to open up this can of worms because the topic, I believe, is more complicated than it outwardly seems. You probably know better than I, but I would guess that 1) Staff might be too busy to make amendments to TnC just yet, esp. because wrong amendments can also lead to potentially greater confusion and chaos and 2) piggybacking off of 1 a little bit, but the complexity of the issue can also make it hard for staff to create proper clarifications within reasonable time.
Lol honestly this thread reminds me of: https://royals.ms/forum/threads/petition-to-end-halloween-gauntlet.176899/#post-1034046 If you wanna prevent getting sacked just don’t go cake ch 1 in henesys or afk in kerning ch 1.
Or get off Maple Island on any channel. Not that I sack the boat in every channel or anything. *cough*
