Rule 0 Rule

[Rohan.]

It's perfect

[Jax]

12 minutes ago, CertifiedKiller said:

sir you are an admin.

Please don't derail the topic with name calling 

[knppel]

19 minutes ago, i dont wanna od in LA said:

The issue with rule 0 is far more complex than just this. People need to take into considerations the background (nationality, country where they reside, etc.) of admins, because their rulings very often depend on this. For example you're more alike to get punished for DM (with a firearm) by an European rather than an American admin & this rule allows them to, even in a case when they're blindly wrong, due to how it's constructed. Same case with roleplay standards, there's a bunch of admins with very high and decent standards, and there's also a bunch of admins with relatively lower standards (respectively compared to the previous group) who also have a different understanding of certain scenarios and situations. I genuinely believe that roleplay communities should strive away from leaving that sort of leeway to admins (because 1) roleplay standards are very subjective and 2) very often depend on real life background of the admin) and instead focus on creating more meaningful and in-depth rules.

While this is correct, the core point stands: Admins need to have the option to interrupt and in case sanction ingame behaviour.

 

Again the football (soccer for you) comparison, yes, one referee might see a foul where another sees a legitimate attempt to steal the ball, another might be particularly sensitive for the player's verbal interaction and so on, but all this does not touch the base rule that a referee can interrupt the game and sanction players for their behaviour (and that their rights to do so are mandatory because elsewise we'll have constant arguments, and admins left with no leeway to stop debates that halt gameplay in the worst cases).

 

The real issue is that the community as a whole lacks a proper approach to publicly discuss possible errors and find common ground, also displayed by the op's approach to generally complain about basic rules opposed to mention a specific example where they're obviously not convinced of how it was handled.

This isn't limited to staff, players just as much tend to have an attitude to not openly talk and reflect about their behaviour, but try to make it look like whatever their character did ingame makes sense even when it didn't.

[i dont wanna od in LA]

1 minute ago, knppel said:

While this is correct, the core point stands: Admins need to have the option to interrupt and in case sanction ingame behaviour.

 

Again the football (soccer for you) comparison, yes, one referee might see a foul where another sees a legitimate attempt to steal the ball, another might be particularly sensitive for the player's verbal interaction and so on, but all this does not touch the base rule that a referee can interrupt the game and sanction players for their behaviour (and that their rights to do so are mandatory because elsewise we'll have constant arguments, and admins left with no leeway to stop debates that halt gameplay in the worst cases).

 

The real issue is that the community as a whole lacks a proper approach to publicly discuss possible errors and find common ground, also displayed by the op's approach to generally complain about basic rules opposed to mention a specific example where they're obviously not convinced of how it was handled.

This isn't limited to staff, players just as much tend to have an attitude to not openly talk and reflect about their behaviour, but try to make it look like whatever their character did ingame makes sense even when it didn't.

They certainly need to have that option but it shouldn't give them as much leeway as it does right now. That's why for an X period of time I was literally pushing that they standardize certain roleplay standards and make up their mind whether they condemn certain sorts of behavior and roleplay or not. It once again boils down to a deeper issue than just that, it's a problem with the server's continuity. To this day the continuity isn't clear whether we do portray California (as we should) or not. How do you expect admins to enforce certain roleplay standards if those standards are not standardized and explained anywhere on the forums or deal with shitty characters if they make sense in whatever the server setting is, despite not making any sense if they were looked at as real life characters. 

[mj2002]

10 minutes ago, i dont wanna od in LA said:

They certainly need to have that option but it shouldn't give them as much leeway as it does right now. 

 

If you believe the leeway given (or taken) is too much, then file a staff report.

[i dont wanna od in LA]

Just now, mj2002 said:

 

If you believe the leeway given (or taken) is too much, then file a staff report.

Read what I said.

[boozie]

4 minutes ago, mj2002 said:

 

If you believe the leeway given (or taken) is too much, then file a staff report.

I've had one on you for 4 months, and nothing has been said, not a word. Very effective.

Edited August 13, 2021 by boozie

[ThatDutchPerson]

So, I've read through the replies and the main topic and I can actually understand your point of view. But there are more sides to such a rule. I'll try to keep it as short as possible.

 

First off, sorry to bring it this blunt, but playing on this server is a privilege and not a right. And this rule is a great exemple of showcasing just that. Moving on;

 

Rule 0 is in place for exactly what you stated. Not everything can be taken into consideration when writing a rule. You can compare this to law making in real life; no law /ever/ written by the most expirienced lawmakers will be futureproof. This is why, in the US for exemple, there is the Supreme Court which holds the final say on all legal matters. They decide what the law actually means in scenarios before them, period.

 

Rule 0 could be considered our version of such a procedure. No rule ever made, no matter the size or details, can be made futureproof and there will be people finding loopholes no one has ever seen before. In this case, Rule 0 is pulled up by the administration team, and more often than not they talk to the offender instead of outright banning him.

 

TLDR:

Admins are rule enforcers.

Management are rule makers.

Rule 0 allows interpretation and discretion of said rules.

 

Every roleplay server has such a rule wether its written or non-written. GTA:World simply just included it in the rulebook even though Nervous can ban who-ever he wants for whatever reason; its his server.

Edited August 13, 2021 by ThatDutchPerson

[PeopleKind]

If you have to double think about if your RP is against the rules... nine times out of ten it is and you shouldnt do it. Dont do questionable shit and you wont get punished, it' not rocket appliances.

[Perstephone]

Rule 0 exists because no person or group of people can think of enough rules to cover every single fucked up degenerate thing this weirdo player base does. If you don't agree with a decision, make a staff report otherwise there isn't much point complaining about the rule.