Rules Determination

[jgordon1111]

Why does this never end,everyone wants everything in black and white. The rules are not black and white why pretend that they are enforced in a consistent manner.

Chap this is only my point of view here no one else's,you say anarchy because it was mentioned to throw the rules out.

But you bypassed the context of the post.


The rules are being enforced in an extreme biased way. Some are allowed to thumb their noses with no penalties,others are punished quickly for the same infractions.

That is the forerunner of the anarchy that you wish to avoid,when the governance of anything is biased, it is anarchy thinly disguised and mislabeled.

I am not going to spend the time to bring in the pages of favoritism,or the counter pages of those not being favored,If you think it is not happening you are in error.

Therefore I believe what is being asked by the OP,is that reform and change happen where the rules are enforced and enforced equally.

[agentcom]

- Secret Diplomacy is enforced when it can be proven. It's super tough to prove secret diplomacy, and it's a bit biased for a person in the game to actually look at whether it was secret diplomacy or just bad luck of being stuck in the wrong place between two players. As for foreign languages, I agree that all foreign language that each player cannot speak should be disallowed in a game regardless of the context of the conversation.

This is basically how it is. If you see another language being spoken, you can report it. The mods will look into it just as with any other SD claim. It could be that it's not actually SD (if the talk has nothing to do with the game), just like any other SD claim.

I've only run across this once, and all I had to do was politely ask for English only in chat and it didn't happen again. So, I agree with the foreign language rule as it is written and have never seen a C&A case on it, so I don't know if there's any problem with enforcement.

[agentcom]

Jgordon,

I think the proposal could rightly, if simplistically, be described as anarchy. Of course, there will always be some rules, but this suggestion seriously tries to keep them to a bare minimum. Woodruff himself said as much.

[deathcomesrippin]

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

[jgordon1111]

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

That is the way I took it. Not an actual call for anarchy.

[deathcomesrippin]

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

That is the way I took it. Not an actual call for anarchy.

I hope not.

[chapcrap]

We'll know when we see his avatar change...

[agentcom]

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

That is the way I took it. Not an actual call for anarchy.

That's what I thought, too. But his response was the one chap quoted. He said he does want to get rid of a lot of the rules.

[TheGeneral2112]

I am thegeneral and I support this suggestion.

[Pedronicus]

Nice thread Woodster.
7 days from you posting such a great list of things for the admin to consider and so far, the amount of admin responses sum up why this site is going down the shitter.

[benga]

Woody made great remarks and he should be heard more.

There us so much inconsistency in applying the rules right now.

And I feel judgements so far were done based on subjective not objective reasons.

[Woodruff]

- Secret Diplomacy is enforced when it can be proven. It's super tough to prove secret diplomacy, and it's a bit biased for a person in the game to actually look at whether it was secret diplomacy or just bad luck of being stuck in the wrong place between two players. As for foreign languages, I agree that all foreign language that each player cannot speak should be disallowed in a game regardless of the context of the conversation.

This is basically how it is. If you see another language being spoken, you can report it. The mods will look into it just as with any other SD claim. It could be that it's not actually SD (if the talk has nothing to do with the game), just like any other SD claim.

I've only run across this once, and all I had to do was politely ask for English only in chat and it didn't happen again. So, I agree with the foreign language rule as it is written and have never seen a C&A case on it, so I don't know if there's any problem with enforcement.

Several exist. Some are ruled such that the use of a foreign language itself constitutes a violation. Some are ruled such that the use of a foreign language itself does not constitute a violation.

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

That is the way I took it. Not an actual call for anarchy.

That's what I thought, too. But his response was the one chap quoted. He said he does want to get rid of a lot of the rules.

I'm VERY confused by your statement here. It appears that, similar to chapcrap, you read one line and didn't work to figure in the context involved never mind read my response to him.

[Woodruff]

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

You are essentially correct, though I would place it a tad above "tongue in cheek" and put it more at "exasperated desperation at something that would mimic standardization".

[Woodruff]

Nice thread Woodster.
7 days from you posting such a great list of things for the admin to consider and so far, the amount of admin responses sum up why this site is going down the shitter.

In truth, 7 days isn't necessarily that long of a time, as the two of them probably don't really inhabit the Suggestions area that much themselves, nor really need to. So I'm not disappointed...yet.

[deathcomesrippin]

I think Woodruff's suggestion was more to try to standardize the rules, with the throwing away of the rules as more of a tongue in cheek "if you dont change just get rid of them" line of thought.

You are essentially correct, though I would place it a tad above "tongue in cheek" and put it more at "exasperated desperation at something that would mimic standardization".

I was being a bit cautious.