"This forum is used to deal with abuse in game - abuse reports, bans etc."
GMs are abusing their powers, that was the perfect place for it!
please move it back, if you dont you would make me cry (you evil pig!)

Matt wrote:who the **** dared to move this thread?
"This forum is used to deal with abuse in game - abuse reports, bans etc."
GMs are abusing their powers, that was the perfect place for it!
please move it back, if you dont you would make me cry (you evil pig!)
That's true. I didn't think about the religious overtones. But I doubt that either Sugar or the "poor pig persecuted player" had religion in mind.InspectorShameless wrote:ok ok, let's calm things down a bit ...If asked kindly enough I'll try to evolve to "licka-mya-assa-poora-piga-Duck", just to please youInkweaver wrote:Calling someone a pig isn't that bad...
I mean check out Inspector Shameless in this thread:Now seriously, if saying things like that is alright but calling someone a pig is bad then there is something wrong.Good idea,
to merge with "pants-downing spell" to make offenders look stupid after cracking some "licka-mya-assa-poora-motha-Duck" !![]()
, so every one can see I don't spare my efforts !
~ hum ... for a rather large third of the non-US world, "pig" is one of the worst and serious insult you can crack because of his religious references ~
+1MasterKenobi wrote:I would like to add my thoughts too this public discussion.
It is my opinion that GM's should NOT get involved in player relationships.
Simple name calling, crude comments, and the like can easily be managed on a player level. The developers have implemented an "ignore" function for this purpose. A player should never come to the courthouse with the complaint "he called me this" or "she said that about me". I have always encouraged players to handle these type of issues on their own, and will continue to do so.
It is also my opinion players should not come to the courthouse with complaints of spamming/begging etc. Unless of course it is causing problems with actual game play, such as lag etc. This can be handled in game. First by using the "ignore" function, but also by contacting a GM in game and have them witness the spamming/begging.
The bottom line for me, is the community should(in theory) be able to moderate itself for the most part. You act like an ass and you get treated in kind, either by being ignored or by rejection. You are kind, and you are treated for the most part with kindness. I realize this will not always be the case and there are exceptions, but a vast majority of the time it works.
Just a few quick thoughts for you to ponder. I will add more later if need be.
MK
I wholeheartedly agree.Cotillion wrote: Cotillions revised rules:
1. No bots (and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game).
The rest of the 'rules' I can have my own control over; with my personal conduct, or rely on the implemented features of the game client. The ignore option is a powerful thing. I certainly don't want any of the GM's stepping in up to try and properly enforce any of these other rules. Any attempt to do so is subject to interpretation. Not a position I would want to be in as a GM.
Cotillions Forum Shadow
+2Wombat wrote:+1MasterKenobi wrote:I would like to add my thoughts too this public discussion.
It is my opinion that GM's should NOT get involved in player relationships.
Simple name calling, crude comments, and the like can easily be managed on a player level. The developers have implemented an "ignore" function for this purpose. A player should never come to the courthouse with the complaint "he called me this" or "she said that about me". I have always encouraged players to handle these type of issues on their own, and will continue to do so.
It is also my opinion players should not come to the courthouse with complaints of spamming/begging etc. Unless of course it is causing problems with actual game play, such as lag etc. This can be handled in game. First by using the "ignore" function, but also by contacting a GM in game and have them witness the spamming/begging.
The bottom line for me, is the community should(in theory) be able to moderate itself for the most part. You act like an ass and you get treated in kind, either by being ignored or by rejection. You are kind, and you are treated for the most part with kindness. I realize this will not always be the case and there are exceptions, but a vast majority of the time it works.
Just a few quick thoughts for you to ponder. I will add more later if need be.
MK
+3Freeyorp101 wrote:+2Wombat wrote:+1MasterKenobi wrote:I would like to add my thoughts too this public discussion.
It is my opinion that GM's should NOT get involved in player relationships.
Simple name calling, crude comments, and the like can easily be managed on a player level. The developers have implemented an "ignore" function for this purpose. A player should never come to the courthouse with the complaint "he called me this" or "she said that about me". I have always encouraged players to handle these type of issues on their own, and will continue to do so.
It is also my opinion players should not come to the courthouse with complaints of spamming/begging etc. Unless of course it is causing problems with actual game play, such as lag etc. This can be handled in game. First by using the "ignore" function, but also by contacting a GM in game and have them witness the spamming/begging.
The bottom line for me, is the community should(in theory) be able to moderate itself for the most part. You act like an ass and you get treated in kind, either by being ignored or by rejection. You are kind, and you are treated for the most part with kindness. I realize this will not always be the case and there are exceptions, but a vast majority of the time it works.
Just a few quick thoughts for you to ponder. I will add more later if need be.
MK
---Freeyorp
+4MasterKenobi wrote:I would like to add my thoughts too this public discussion.
It is my opinion that GM's should NOT get involved in player relationships.
Simple name calling, crude comments, and the like can easily be managed on a player level. The developers have implemented an "ignore" function for this purpose. A player should never come to the courthouse with the complaint "he called me this" or "she said that about me". I have always encouraged players to handle these type of issues on their own, and will continue to do so.
It is also my opinion players should not come to the courthouse with complaints of spamming/begging etc. Unless of course it is causing problems with actual game play, such as lag etc. This can be handled in game. First by using the "ignore" function, but also by contacting a GM in game and have them witness the spamming/begging.
The bottom line for me, is the community should(in theory) be able to moderate itself for the most part. You act like an ass and you get treated in kind, either by being ignored or by rejection. You are kind, and you are treated for the most part with kindness. I realize this will not always be the case and there are exceptions, but a vast majority of the time it works.
Just a few quick thoughts for you to ponder. I will add more later if need be.
MK
+5Cotillion wrote:GM's should not be protecting us, but maybe that is our fault. We are all living by the rules set out for us..
1. Do not abuse other players (it means insults, swearing etc. directed to a particular person/s)
2. No bots (and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game).
3. No spamming/flooding (including trade spam).
4. No begging.
5. Speak English on public chat.
6. RFC 1855.
Right or Wrong, the GM's are trying to enforce those rules. Some of these rules IMO shouldn't exist, at least not as a proper list for GM's to govern over. The ONLY thing I want GM's to do is to do what they have been doing to ban botters. We all understand this rule very clearly and the GM's have a clear process on when to ban these people. Again, the only rule I would like to see GM's manage is:
Cotillions revised rules:
1. No bots (and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game).
The rest of the 'rules' I can have my own control over; with my personal conduct, or rely on the implemented features of the game client. The ignore option is a powerful thing. I certainly don't want any of the GM's stepping in up to try and properly enforce any of these other rules. Any attempt to do so is subject to interpretation. Not a position I would want to be in as a GM.
Cotillions Forum Shadow