::Forum - GNS - Star Wars Combine::

Page 1 2

Year 8 Day 300 16:11	GNS
Skye Sarn	All I have to say is this: Veynom says no. ____________ Archduke Skye Sarn, Lord Duke of Dunthril, 2nd of House Tanthar

Year 8 Day 300 20:10	GNS
Syn	Tulon: The leader of NAO has stated the quote did not originate from their faction. This means that the next step would be for the party who made the post to prove it did. However, in regard to whether it was or was not godmoding, Veynom posted in the GNS posts thread in General Talk the last time a similar situation came up, and stated that it's fine to make a claim, but not fine to actually roleplay another character. The example given on day 257 was the following: “Seems you can't make the difference between posting: Reporter> Do you know Eric Jackson ate a baby ? and posting: Eric Jackson> I ate a baby for breakfast today. The first is an obvious lie. The second is godmodding the character Eric Jackson. - Veynom ” This clearly means that the most recent GNS post is indeed godmoding the evidently sole NAO governor, as it was directly quoting him (the identical situation for which a past GNS post was removed, resulting in Veynom's quote) unless the poster can present some sort of evidence to the contrary. It is beyond propaganda, as it directly roleplayed an NAO governor in a news feed making a statement that as far as we know did not occur. However, if this is now acceptable, I've got a post coming up that features a GE emperor (but I won't tell you which one!) making a few questionable statements that I suspect wouldn't be taken to kindly. Edited By: Syn on Year 8 Day 300 20:11 ____________

Year 8 Day 300 21:11	GNS
Tyr Tulon	I saw Vey discuss it with a few other people, where the conclusion they reached was that if they made SEMINc reveal the source to the admins to determine if it'd be deleted or not would be giving Wil info OOC, and that if he wanted to know IC, he'd have to find out IC, so they weren't going to interfere, meaning NAO would have to prove it didn't come from them or a member of theirs if anything's going to happen from that angle. As far as godmoding, if they weren't actually quoting someone, then it probably is godmoding. Really, I wouldn't be the one to ask or make that judgment. However, if you look at the rules for posting on the GNS, the only time it brings up anything like godmoding, it starts "Posts that are not relevant to any database-affecting actions", basically meaning it doesn't apply to this post. Should the rules be changed to fix this and preventing it from happening in the future? Absolutely. But, the post didn't break the GNS rules as they are written now.

Year 8 Day 300 21:22	GNS
Hal Breden	“I saw Vey discuss it with a few other people, where the conclusion they reached was that if they made SEMINc reveal the source to the admins to determine if it'd be deleted or not would be giving Wil info OOC, and that if he wanted to know IC, he'd have to find out IC, so they weren't going to interfere, meaning NAO would have to prove it didn't come from them or a member of theirs if anything's going to happen from that angle. ” Didn't I already address this? “Nor would Veynom have to name the source, at any point, to confirm it came from someone in NAO. ” Yup, there it is. Do I need to spell it out? I really didn't think so, because I know Veynom to be smarter than for that to be necessary. Veynom asks Seminc, in private, for the person that sent them the post. He then asks that person, in private, for the source of their quotes. If the source is not in the NAO, then the GNS is illegal. If the source IS in the NAO, then Veynom asks them if they really said what is in the GNS. If they do, then he posts here that there was no godmoding. Nobody except Veynom needs to be given any names at any point. Nobody is being asked to publically reveal their sources. To NOT perform this investigation is negligent and as direct an insult to the NAO as the GNS post is. “However, if you look at the rules for posting on the GNS, the only time it brings up anything like godmoding, it starts "Posts that are not relevant to any database-affecting actions", basically meaning it doesn't apply to this post. ” This post is NOT about DB-affecting actions. It's about insulting the NAO with fake quotes. If it was intended to be a news post about NMI/Mandalore taking NAO systems, then it would be saying that, and it would not instead be filled with and focusing on illegal godmoding. It is against the spirit of the rules, as the Golden Rule has been quoted, and then confirmed BY THE PERSON THAT WROTE THOSE RULES. Posts have been deleted for this before. The apparent defense here is that the person has not been named, which is completely irrelevant to anything. ____________ "May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies." Only fools and children dream of heroes.

Year 8 Day 300 21:42	GNS
Tyr Tulon	“Do I need to spell it out? ” Do I? Vey confirming that someone in NAO did that IS giving him information, even if he doesn't give out their name, he's warning Wil that someone in his faction did in fact take that action and ask for it to be posted. Your suggestion was discussed at the time and rejected. “This post is NOT about DB-affecting actions. ” I disagree and already explained it. It's about who took or didn't take over some planets. That is a DB-affecting action. That it made NAO look like fools doesn't change that. “It is against the spirit of the rules ” Then change the rules so it actually is a rules violation in the future. “then confirmed BY THE PERSON THAT WROTE THOSE RULES. ” To quote someone who is tied directly to NAO, "If the rule is subject to his interpretation for clarification then he should re-write it so that it is clearer." He/she has a good point, and since they're not online atm for me to ask if they mind being quoted on that, I'm not going to say who it was. The point still stands though. Really, what he meant to say isn't nearly as important as what he said when it comes to enforcing the rules.

Year 8 Day 300 22:38	GNS
Hal Breden	“Vey confirming that someone in NAO did that IS giving him information, even if he doesn't give out their name, he's warning Wil that someone in his faction did in fact take that action and ask for it to be posted ” So it's better to ignore the rules than to investigate a possible violation? What kind of logic is that? That one of a minimum of 30 people made negative comments about the faction is not information, when that person can quite easily deny it to WvI's face. Try applying the same logic to a Spying Rules violation, and tell me that you can't investigate Seminc having the NAO ship list, because it'll tell WvI whether someone in his faction is betraying him. “Then change the rules so it actually is a rules violation in the future. ” Rules that need to be CLARIFIED are still punishable, and people have been in the past for violating those rules. In fact, one of the last times it happened, a member of the NAO renamed a captured Imperial-datacard ship, and began hailing with it to falsely appear to be sending messages from an Imperial ship. Not only was this investigated (oh no, giving the Imperials IC information!) but punishment was handed out and THEN the wording of the rule was corrected. Once again, I call for the same rules and standards to apply to everybody. “Really, what he meant to say isn't nearly as important as what he said when it comes to enforcing the rules. ” Luckily, we have the Golden Rule that says it is. ____________ "May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies." Only fools and children dream of heroes.

Year 8 Day 301 10:24	GNS
Auron Tamerin	The quotes never came from me (Being the sole Governor within the NAO) So for the arguments of "It came from this Governor" then prove it came from me, I dare you to do that because if you can, then not only has the golden rule been broken, but the GNS rule AND the spying rules (Of impersonating another character in SWC) Complain about it all you want Tulon, it was god-moding, as there are no other Governors within the NAO other then myself then the ruling on god-moding of what Veynom stated for which I will repeat: “Seems you can't make the difference between posting: Reporter> Do you know Eric Jackson ate a baby ? and posting: Eric Jackson> I ate a baby for breakfast today. The first is an obvious lie. The second is godmodding the character Eric Jackson. - Veynom ” Apply. Edited By: Auron Tamerin on Year 8 Day 301 10:34

Year 8 Day 301 10:25	GNS
Wilhelm von Ismay	The NAO has one player character governor. I've known him for longer than this game has even existed. He is, sadly, the bastard that conned me into playing the Combine in the first place: Auron Tamerin. If he tells me, out of character, that he didn't give them any quotes, I have a tendency to believe him over... Pretty much anyone. ____________ Patriarch of House Ismay
Year 8 Day 301 12:04	GNS
Tyr Tulon	“So it's better to ignore the rules than to investigate a possible violation? ” Really, since there's no actual rule against godmoding, what rules is being ignored? Furthermore, I don't give a rats ass if it's looked into or not, but Vey and the others at the time made their decision. “Rules that need to be CLARIFIED are still punishable ” That's retarded. If you're going to write the rules someone, like on the rules page, and someone follows what's written, they're following the rules. If someone writes crappy rules and comes back later to say "oh I meant this when I wrote it, even if it doesn't say that, pretend a real rule was broken" that's just dumb. “people have been in the past for violating those rules. ” Because it's been done in the past doesn't make it right, or mean that's what should happen. By that logic, NIO shouldn't have been allowed to break away from GE, the was the Dark Empire was forced to merge back. Genocide's been committed in the past, sometimes unsuccessfully like the Holocaust, sometimes more successfully like with Native Americans and the original inhabitants of Australia, so by your logic, it's wrong for it to stop, since it's been done in the past. “In fact, one of the last times it happened, a member of the NAO renamed a captured Imperial-datacard ship, and began hailing with it to falsely appear to be sending messages from an Imperial ship. Not only was this investigated (oh no, giving the Imperials IC information!) but punishment was handed out and THEN the wording of the rule was corrected. ” And I disagreed with that too. Just because that was handled poorly, does that mean we have to make sure this is too? “Luckily, we have the Golden Rule that says it is. ” Actually, it doesn't, lets look at what the Golden Rule actually says. “Golden Rule: Use the Combine features in the spirit in which they have been designed. Don't try to exploit the features, use your common sense when using them. Ask yourself what is the purpose of the feature you are using and as such, what is the normal use for it. Abuses will be punished. ” There's nothing in their about the person who wrote rules being able to say "oops, I meant it a different way that it's actually written". Actually, it doesn't say anything at all about the rules. The feature being used is the GNS, the rules page clearly explains the purpose of the feature, and as I already explained, it hasn't been violated, abused, bugged, or in any other way exploited. Yet another rule you've brought up that has absolutely no relevance. “Complain about it all you want Tulon, it was god-moding, as there are no other Governors within the NAO other then myself ” Even if we assume godmoding, which I don't give a rats ass either way, it still hasn't broken a GNS rule. “The quotes never came from me (Being the sole Governor within the NAO) So for the arguments of "It came from this Governor" then prove it came from me, I dare you to do that because if you can, then not only has the golden rule been broken, but the GNS rule AND the spying rules (Of impersonating another character in SWC) ” I don't think I ever made the "It came from a Governor" or whatever argument. I believe I've always said it doesn't matter, that it doesn't break the GNS rules either way. I also explained about the spying rules earlier in this post. As far as the spying rules, you may have a case there. A decent one at the very least. That's definitely a rule that may (and appears to) have been broken. Run with that one, and drop the GNS rules violation bit.

Year 8 Day 301 12:28	GNS
Hal Breden	The Golden Rule exists to prevent exactly what you are trying to do - pervert the imprecise wording of the rules in order to justify doing something that is against the rules. And now you're trying to pervert the imprecise wording of the Golden Rule, to justify ignoring it? “Just because that was handled poorly, does that mean we have to make sure this is too? ” Yes. The exact same rules need to apply to everyone, or we may as well not have rules in the first place. The rule that was broken here has been enforced in the past, and needs to be enforced now. A potential change to the rule can be discussed after the rule has been enforced. Rules can neither be enforced nor ignored retroactively. ____________ "May the Grace of Ara go with you, and His Vengeance be wrought upon your enemies." Only fools and children dream of heroes.

Year 8 Day 301 13:47	GNS
Jeb`el Ras	“Veynom asks Seminc, in private, for the person that sent them the post. He then asks that person, in private, for the source of their quotes. If the source is not in the NAO, then the GNS is illegal. If the source IS in the NAO, then Veynom asks them if they really said what is in the GNS. If they do, then he posts here that there was no godmoding. Nobody except Veynom needs to be given any names at any point. ” “So it's better to ignore the rules than to investigate a possible violation? What kind of logic is that? ” “The exact same rules need to apply to everyone, or we may as well not have rules in the first place. ” I agree with Hal that ALL rules violations should be investigated. I just wish more people would have that attitude. Unfortunately, the common attitude seems to be to turn a blind eye, and people only speak up when a rules violation harms them IC. “I discussed this with the team and I fail to see the godmode. We have some fictional NPC saying "everything is fine, don't believe the house is burning" and all the show coming from an entertainment faction .... I wonder where is the rules problem. ” I tend to agree with Veynom, except to me it sounded like a PC, not an NPC. Otherwise, I don't see any godmodding either, unless someone can show the quotes were entirely made up by the writer. What everyone seems to be overlooking here is that the anonymous person quoted doesn't necessarily even have to be an actual NAO governor. They could be an NAO member who represented themselves as such. They don't even have to have called themselves a governor 'Governor' is a common, generic title in theis game (like admiral or baron, but unlike Emperor), and even if NAO only actually has 1 official governor right now, it's doubtful the galaxy at large knows or cares, so it's not impersonation of Auron either. That seems to be Veynom's decision on the matter. It HAS been looked into. Should it be investigated further? If so, should it have higher priority for the simmaster than other current rules violation investigations that have actual in-game effects? Which takes us right back to what I said previously. Best solution would be for an asim to contact the poster and determine if the quote is legit, or made up. Or NAO could accept Veynom's decision and spend 5 minutes and 2k in game and post a GNS pointing out that they only have one Governor, that he denies making the statements, and generally laughing at the lame GNS they want deleted. ____________ ' ' ', ` Jeb`el eXiles CEO Galactic Federation of Free Alliances Senator Commodore (ret), DCMF When all its work is done, the lie shall rot; The truth is great, and shall prevail, When none cares whether it prevail or not. - Coventr

Year 8 Day 301 14:18	GNS
Tyr Tulon	The Golden Rule exists to prevent things from being use in a way no one had thought or intended, basically to make using bugs illegal. There's nothing in it about the rules not meaning what they say, or asking the person who wrote them what they meant to have written but didn't. I haven't perverted anything. I've simply pointed out that you've stretched the rules to cover situations they don't apply to, just like you're trying to do again now. For the second part, there are basically two ways to look at it. Either you think we should improve when and where we can, and learn from our mistakes and correct them and things like that, or you think we should intentionally repeat every mistake we make, which would quickly turn the combine into a piece of crap. "The rule that was broken here" ... wasn't broken? Since we just keep going in circles, I think this may be my last post.

1 2

	Year	Day	Time
	14	172	22:02:24

Logged in as
Guest