The process of amending rules

[Triple Seven]

So, as we all know from this announcement, a rule was added. Likely in an attempt to respond to a very popular topic on the matter. That seemed to be it, rule implemented, no further announcement made. Until you realize today, reading a report (outcome pending) of someone’s character being abducted and transported to a ‘quiet’ area (subjective, as said: outcome pending). The reported party responds with (paraphrasing): “it’s allowed, cause we’re an illegal faction”. I’m not going to comment on the report, but it did lead me to see something where a severe lack of communication is showing: The rule was amended, seemingly by one side (IFM), and the community wasn’t notified, other than in the linked topic, where players not involved with IFM, usually won’t look because there is no reason for them to visit that part of the forums.
 

And so we get to the suggestion: Don’t amend rules without a general announcement about it.

 

Additionally: The wording in the post on the IFM noticeboard is less than ideal and (to me) implies organized crime factions aren’t held to a high(er) standard, which can’t be what’s meant, surely. If a non-affiliated criminal might be liable to stricter consequences (if admin permission is given) as mentioned by the rule, then shouldn’t that be the outset for the serious illegal roleplayers?

TL;DR: Communicate all rule changes with a general announcement and proofread the wording of the amendment and the announcement.

 

[Keane]

The rule itself was not adjusted or amended in any way since the announcement made by Nervous. The announcement by Bospy was just going into more detail as there was some confusion about the rule itself from illegal factions. They wanted clarification on how it was going to be enforced by admins. It's IFM's role to facilitate communication between the admin team and illegal factions. All that announcement was doing was communicating how it affects illegal factions specifically, not changing anything.

 

1 hour ago, Triple Seven said:

Additionally: The wording in the post on the IFM noticeboard is less than ideal and (to me) implies organized crime factions aren’t held to a high(er) standard, which can’t be what’s meant, surely. If a non-affiliated criminal might be liable to stricter consequences (if admin permission is given) as mentioned by the rule, then shouldn’t that be the outset for the serious illegal roleplayers?

You've misunderstood. Factions are actually held to a much higher standard. Allowing them to bypass rules that are aimed at ridding the server of poor roleplayers and malicious players is a way of reducing the amount of red tape they have to go through to RP. Rather than blanket banning everyone from committing robberies of a certain type, there's freedom given to illegal factions. Between their leadership and IFM, there's plenty of systems for quality control. The report you're referring to will either be taken by a member of IFM who is more knowledgeable and better equipped to make a ruling, or handled by another admin who will consult IFM on how to proceed. If the faction members are found to be in breach of any rules or their RP was seen as below the standard expected from factions, you can expect action to be taken against the faction itself. This is all clarified in Bospy's post that I'll link below.
 

 

[Triple Seven]

4 minutes ago, Keane said:

[...]

 

If that subparagraph wasn't added at a later point, mea culpa. I can't remember for the life of me that that was in from the start. There's plenty to be said on the matter, but that's not what this suggestion is for or is about. Thanks for the response.

[Cypher99]

“Restricted Crime Zones do not apply to scripted illegal factions with a historical claim to an area, such as a gang operating within their own neighborhood or neighborhoods they would realistically operate in based on their real life equivalent and in-character development. This should not be done excessively, however.”

 

@Triple Seven @Keane
 

Might I also suggest that this may be forgotten and should be reinforced. Just because they are in an illegal faction doesn’t automatically exempt them from the rules. They should be historically operating in that area by my understanding, based on their development, to be exempt from these zones. As defined here. I can see this becoming a “I’m in an illegal faction and that gives me the right to ignore these zones no matter what” type of situation happening. People will conveniently ignore the “with a historical claim to the area” criteria and just see it as a “oh I’m exempt because I’m in an illegal faction”. If a faction wants to drive from Vinewood down to Strawberry, far from where they historically operate and outside of their normal development, I feel they should still be subject to the rules of the restricted and crime free zones. That’s just my humble opinion. 

Edited January 23, 2022 by Cypher99