Rule 1.4 Co-operation and Evasion (Staff discretion?)

[Alabin]

A user recently made a successful dispute against a ban for breaking rule 3.4.


Here follows the answer to the successful dispute:

Here follows the as of June 4th description of rule 1.4 Co-operation and Evasion:

My question is whether staff are allowed to make up the acctual content of a rule based on the title of a rule?

 

[Alabin]

For arguments sake, let us say that he did indeed break the rule of "not following the orders of a staff member despite them being correct or not".

Is then a 1 week ban reasonable for simply not listening to those incorrect orders?


Would introducing official ban lenghts to each rule be a good idea? Cause evidently staff discretion can lack in judgement and this is surely not the first time.

 

[Jonah]

LIterally what happened here is staff discretion.

pls fix staff discretion

 

[Puffy Sandvich]

I don't believe that this was a breach of 1.4. Instead I believe it was a stupid thing to do, but hardly something that I'd ban someone for a week for. I would dispute it again however because this is not a breach of 1.4 as defined. The rules should not need to be interpreted in complex manners outside of the definition.

 

[Imperial Watch]

My question is whether staff are allowed to make up the acctual content of a rule based on the title of a rule?

By all logical means, no.
But this is the PH staff we are talking about here.

 

[Alabin]

LIterally what happened here is staff discretion.

pls fix staff discretion

I don't believe that this was a breach of 1.4. Instead I believe it was a stupid thing to do, but hardly something that I'd ban someone for a week for. I would dispute it again however because this is not a breach of 1.4 as defined. The rules should not need to be interpreted in complex manners outside of the definition.

By all logical means, no.
But this is the PH staff we are talking about here.

The issue here is with this line of text at the absolute top of the Rules page:

"Contained within this document are the rules of this game server and community; these rules are subject to an administrator’s discretion and will be upheld to the full extent and power of their duty."


Now if you define discretion solely as the ability to make whatever judgement you please then it could potentially be used in pretty irresponsible ways.

However it could also be defined as the "ability to make responsible decisions" and "the quality of having or showing good judgement...".

Perhaps it wouldn't have to be an all that bad thing unless you made it one...

 

[Imperial Watch]

The issue here is with this line of text at the absolute top of the Rules page:

"Contained within this document are the rules of this game server and community; these rules are subject to an administrator’s discretion and will be upheld to the full extent and power of their duty."


Now if you define discretion solely as the ability to make whatever judgement you please then it could potentially be used in pretty irresponsible ways.

However it could also be defined as the "ability to make responsible decisions" and "the quality of having or showing good judgement...".

Perhaps it wouldn't have to be an all that bad thing unless you made it one...

There is literally nothing in rule 1.4 that suggests you have to follow a staff order unless it is tied to demos and the sharing thereof, other than the title.
If staff members are now able to create their own rules based solely on what the rule is called and not the actual subject matter of the rule written thereafter, that would just be plain dumb.

 

[Alabin]

There is literally nothing in rule 1.4 that suggests you have to follow a staff order unless it is tied to demos and the sharing thereof, other than the title.
If staff members are now able to create their own rules based solely on what the rule is called and not the actual subject matter of the rule written thereafter, that would just be plain dumb.

Fully agree. Some line needs to be set by @MrLewis or @Bolli so that it won't occur.
A proper definition of what "an adminstrator's discretion" includes and what it does not include.

 

[TinySlayer]