Rule Suggestion (3.12 Mayoral Assassination)

[tony goya]

Suggestion Topic: 3.12 Mayoral Assassination
Suggestion Description: I think this rule should be re-evaluated. Make it more discriptive.

Why should this be added?:
- after having an amicable admin sit with Auston, after myself and others killed the mayor. I received a warning for what was described as "unwritten rules". For the most part the unwritten rules make sense, however with them not even being hinted at within 3.12 it is my belief that the rule needs to be amended to reflect it. For example, let's say you have 2 new players who do their due diligence and real 3.12 before attempting it. They follow that is written. They would have no idea about any unwritten rule, just as I, someone with 24 days on the server, had no idea about. this situation would end with an admin sit that wouldn't be necessary if 3.12 reflected the "unwritten rules". Some of these rules include, the person/ persons have to make it clear that taxes must be lowerd or else ( regardless if many others have done so in advert already). Set a time that must be waited after the advert before an attempt can be made. This would stop people from making an advert and less then a min later attempting to kill the mayor. Over all I think this rule needs an overhall as it is discribing a big event, yet is shorter then that i have written above. Thank you

What negatives could this have?:
- I do not think that making a rule more clear and dicriptive has any negatives. It only servers to make things more clear for anyone reading them and informing themselves about said rule. Whilst also making it easier to enforce the rule because its clearly explained.

 

[money]

Don't think there is much confusion to be had. All you need to do is demonstrate and then later tell to the staff member that you (atleast) attempted to directly seek the Mayor to appeal to the conditions that negatively affect you and plead for change.

If you couldn't locate the Mayor despite fair efforts, you may further seek change via non-direct methods (advertisements) by you yourself or your affiliates (not random people, preferably, as they may not have directly attempted to seek change) voicing disapproval.

If this fails, after a reasonable time, you may seek to kill him. Common sense should be atleast 15 minutes to hear from the Mayor about changes or attempts to make the change. No need to slap a timer here.

Now what may be mentioned in the rule is that advertisements alone do not constitute as a sufficient direct warning, if it isn't clear.

 

[MalekIsWeird]

There is no such thing as "Unwritten rules," There's the rules, Period. The way that Administration and Management intend it to be enforced is how Moderators enforce it. Especially when rules are not cut and dry like 3.4 where guides are made to clarify it because in it's nature it's an abstract rule.

Auston is a Moderator, he takes his instructions regarding how broad and abstract rules are meant to be enforced from the Management that wrote the rules to further clarify them.

Personally, I would recommend any player to IGNORE any "unwritten rule" nonsense and educate oneself on what is written and what's clarified in the guides like the 3.4 guide for example.

I have had multiple accepted ban disputes because I simply do 3 things:

1) Read the rules and the guides on the rules if there are any.
2) Ask management (Admin+) for clarification or higher up word on how the rules actually are intended to be followed if there is any confusion
3) Don't fold or admit wrong immediately, shut up; stay cool and read the situation intelligently. In any case, if you're accused, you need to be cool-headed and refer back to the proper sources of the law that you're expected to follow.

That said, if after proper review, you find that genuinely you are guilty of the infraction, You coming clean the moment you realize after reviewing yourself that you actually were wrong proves multiple good things (No malice, Honesty, Genuine, etc..) that will greatly sway the perception of the staff. This resulting in a far more lenient punishment and is the best approach for a guilty case because you still give yourself due process by self-reviewing to ensure you're not falsely accused then you are transparent when you conclude that you were in fact guilty.

I would actually recommend making a Community Suggestion asking for a 3.12 Guide. I did this for 2.5 and the guide was extremely helpful to many so it would not be a bad idea and would do more justice to your core request, being that you wish for more clarification on how the rule works intricately.

 

[Collier]

3.12 Guide

A 3.12 guide is coming, made mainly by @Valentine with my input. The focus was originally going to be to clarify what detrimental policies are, but we'd be happy to expand on the steps that one should make to kill the Mayor.

@money has already put this quite elegantly, though I'd like to draw attention to the actual wording of the rule, being that "...players should attempt to directly convince the Mayor to improve city management or change their tax policies before attempting an assassination."

If I am understanding your warning correctly, it does not appear that the above quoted portion of the rule was followed?

I am open to changing the wording from "convince" to something more threatning, but of course the limitations of the advert chat (being that you can't directly threaten murder in them) might conflict with a stronger wording of 3.12. If you have no direct line of communication to the Mayor, you can not outright threaten them with death, so if your only option is to veil a threat in a realistic advert, that is usually totally sufficient.

 

[Collier]

We believe the rule is clear enough as it is