Giacobbe

Straying away from the main subject slightly, but I think a couple of others in here have made an important point. Becoming official should not carry any IC rewards. It should merely be an OOC label and carry with it OOC, quality of life rewards. I do not agree that you should have to portray an inferior outfit just because you do not share the same OOC label. There were many times during our stint as unofficial where official factions would start arbitrary beefs with us over nonsense, assumingly because they knew we'd have to take it lying down in order to abide by the rules. This is insane for a "heavy roleplay" community.

I'm all for normalizing punishments, especially if it encourages higher quality roleplay and acts as a tougher deterrent against rule-breaking. The caveat here being there's a consistent approach to handing out punishments across the board and not just harsher sanctions because a player irked an admin the wrong way. This works in both ways — harsher punishments where deserved and more lenient/no punishment where none is warranted. The discussion open alongside this one around context is very relevant here. I've seen players reported recently for fairly standard illegal scenarios and it's bewildered me that admins have even entertained the reporter. However, I don't think admin jails are fit-for-purpose at all. They're an outdated form of punishment and shouldn't serve a purpose in any gaming format. You're essentially having a real-life punishment enforced on you for breaking the rules of a game. By real-life I mean you actually have to dedicate your time in order to fulfil your punishment. Liken this to rule-breaking in another game, i.e. CS:GO. Let's say a player uses derogatory slurs against another and he/she is sanctioned by Valve. Would forcing the player to stand around in an empty server for x amount of time be considered a viable punishment? No, because it's akin to putting someone in prison. Make punishments relevant and consistent. A player insults another through OOC channels? Communication ban then, disable all OOC access. This is all coming from someone who has never been admin jailed. Tying in with the above, I think bans should be the default form of significant punishment starting from as little as either 12 or 24 hours scaling up to permanent/indefinite bans for severe rule-breaking or repeat offenders. Prior to this, insignificant offenses should be punished via warnings or even by providing education/guidance. Kicking someone (aside from being AFK) achieves nothing. The player will return and re-offend.

I don't want to deviate from the subject at hand here, but I'm not sure I'm following you. We're playing on what's dubbed as a heavy roleplay server. If 'poor character portrayal' isn't a complete contradiction of the server's core values and a direct breach of the ruleset we abide by then I haven't got a clue what is.

I can't agree with either of you here. Granted certain rules are applicable regardless of the scenario, i.e. think metagaming, but various other rules can be interpreted differently given the context of the situation. More often than not this context revolves around the character's faction affiliation, which is where prior knowledge of illegal roleplay or the specific subgenre of illegal roleplay is valuable. Take the following two scenarios and try apply the rules in exactly the same manner: Scenario 1: a group of thugs mug a law-abiding teenager. The teenager is uncooperative, so they beat him up for his possessions and leave him for dead on the side of the street. The teenager is found by a passer-by and is taken to hospital, where he eventually makes a recovery. The law-abiding teenager then gathers a group of friends, locates the parties involved, and kills them as an act of revenge. Scenario 2: a group of thugs mug a captain from a notorious LCN outfit. The mobster is uncooperative, so they beat him up for his possessions and leave him for dead on the side of the street. The mobster is found by a passer-by and is taken to hospital, where he eventually makes a recovery. The captain sends out a hit-squad to retaliate against the thugs. The hit-squad locates the parties involved and executes them as an act of revenge. Are you able to treat both scenarios with equal merit? If not, why? Would scenario 1 be classed as deathmatch and poor escalation? If yes, why wouldn't scenario 2 be treated as so? In scenario 2, what significance does the victim's stature within the mob play? Would the outcome of scenario 2 be any different if the victim was only an associate and not an inducted member? Why? Would someone with no prior experience or knowledge of illegal roleplay - or more specifically the LCN subgenre - be able to confidently answer all of those questions? If no, then the outcome of any decision making involved in the report player process would not be as educated as someone who can confidently answer yes.