Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2019-08-26, 06:32
Sign in to follow this  
Hollows

What's Up With These Verdicts?

Recommended Posts

You already know my view on these types of issues with these types of people. I too have quarrel with how staff has been behaving recently with reports (a la Berezino BadRP) and would like an explanation more than "this isn't a rulebreak" or "this person is filing a false report".

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Moshi Moshi!

I agree with you this verdict is bad, it's not right at all. For instance, I have read many reports that mention punching and so on being ruleplay if the one being punched kills the attacker. I will link one below.

Above is a report that isn't too different from the one in question. A man punches someone, and because of this, they deem they had kill rights because of the punch. As you can see in the report and the verdict that they were hit with rule play. Because quite simply, it is. It looks like rule play in the report Dusty posted as well.

Rule play:  Obtaining kill rights alone does not give you explicit permission to use them any time you want and in all situations.

This means that you should always try prioritizing roleplay over the rules, instead of killing Dusty he could have put up a fun little fist fight. There was a lot of potential in this but it was lost because someone was trigger happy.

The rest of the verdict is also ridiculous in my opinion.

For one how is that baiting? That is simply roleplaying asking someone for help from some creep who is bothering you, and pestering you. There was some back and forth sure, but what I find crazy is that much more back talk happens when someone is a hostage. I have seen WORSE backtalk from people and yet why are they not getting hit with baiting for back talking? Regardless of who did it first.

If anything there is a question there too, why was the accused not hit for baiting as well? Following someone, asking them where they are going and in general being a pest can very well be seen as baiting. I have seen it verdict as such before, where someone follows the OP for a good while. Even when the OP shows ALL signs of wanting to leave, and not get involved as Dusty did. He might have asked the people to rob the accused. Yet how is this seen as baiting? This is just ROLEPLAY, from someone who was tired of being harassed by someone. So they took it into their own hands.

I would advise @Roland and the other admins to double check the report. Because I think it is not right.

Edit: My bad he didn't get hit with baiting but NVFL? That is silly too. Just take a second look at the report regardless. I AM TIRED T_T

Edited by Aiko

Share this post


Link to post

If you attack someone while clearly outnumbered or without a plausible chance of successfully winning, it may be considered NVFL.

Attacking with your bare fists someone holding a rifle, who also happens to have reinforcements around is pretty clear NVFL to me. Like it's literally worse than popular saying of "bringing a knife to a gun fight". He didn't even have a knife.

I don't know where you got these made up rules that attacking someone with their fists is not a hostile action one cannot defend from? Since when does everyone on the server get a free haymaker on other players without possibility of retaliation? Can I run and punch everyone I meet once or twice and hope that someone actually defends themselves and shoots me so that I can report them for attempted invalid kill and get them banned? That's silly.

I've seen a few clips from our server where someone held up at gun point and disarmed suddenly runs up, punches the guy holding the rifle and the guy passes out and his weapons are picked up. IMO people need to be able to defend themselves if they feel threatened, doesn't matter if it's with fists, knife, bat or gun. Sure, punching can also be part of role play and in some situations it doesn't justify using kill rights gained, however if someone all of a sudden runs up to me and punches me while I'm armed, you can bet I would drop them.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

we got these "made up rules" from the verdicts that set a precedent that punching someone a single time is ruleplay. I linked a few in the other thread. If you think that this isn't ruleplay then maybe you should have a talk with the staff team to get some consistency in reports or clarify the rules.

I obviously agree with you that if someone starts kicking your ass out of nowhere then you should have rights on them 100% and you should probably use them but when someone punches you once after some insults/light hostile RP and backs away after dont you think that it's a bit much to spray them down?

Edited by Zombru

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Roland said:

I don't know where you got these made up rules that attacking someone with their fists is not a hostile action one cannot defend from? Since when does everyone on the server get a free haymaker on other players without possibility of retaliation? Can I run and punch everyone I meet once or twice and hope that someone actually defends themselves and shoots me so that I can report them for attempted invalid kill and get them banned? That's silly.

You're missing the point, retaliation is perfectly fine but how does one justify spraying someone down full auto after a single punch? There's something known as "hostile escalation," so if someone punches you, punch them back, if someone attacks you with a machete and you only have a gun, well you have to use it at this point, I know this server isn't like that at all which sucks, but its a point we should be aiming for.

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Jerry said:

You're missing the point, retaliation is perfectly fine but how does one justify spraying someone down full auto after a single punch? There's something known as "hostile escalation," so if someone punches you, punch them back, if someone attacks you with a machete and you only have a gun, well you have to use it at this point, I know this server isn't like that at all which sucks, but its a point we should be aiming for.

You're absolutely right, I am a huge fan of "eye for an eye" and having comparable level between action and re-action when it comes to hostilities. This is for example why we have the execution rule state that you can only execute people if they actually participated in death of your ally. This way people get kill for kill, and can't be executed for something silly like not being able to sing. And this works well in scenarios where you are role playing with others, you can take your time, agree on things and get permission OOC.

In situations like in the report where the attack is sudden, unprovoked, without any initiation, it's very difficult to get attacked and then think about what just happened and start disarming yourself in order to punch back. First thing you think is to protect yourself and with a loaded gun in your hands, that's a very easy thing to do. In those sudden situations you don't know if the person is going to continue punching and stunlock you or start running away or perhaps something else. So you don't have that luxury as you have with more slow paced RP.

Therefore it is in my opinion justifiable that if you suddenly or unprovoked get attacked and there's no notice of it happening like an initiation, even if it is just with fists you should always be able to defend yourself. And in general I think it is a bad idea to punch people with guns.

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Roland said:

You're absolutely right, I am a huge fan of "eye for an eye" and having comparable level between action and re-action when it comes to hostilities. This is for example why we have the execution rule state that you can only execute people if they actually participated in death of your ally. This way people get kill for kill, and can't be executed for something silly like not being able to sing. And this works well in scenarios where you are role playing with others, you can take your time, agree on things and get permission OOC.

In situations like in the report where the attack is sudden, unprovoked, without any initiation, it's very difficult to get attacked and then think about what just happened and start disarming yourself in order to punch back. First thing you think is to protect yourself and with a loaded gun in your hands, that's a very easy thing to do. In those sudden situations you don't know if the person is going to continue punching and stunlock you or start running away or perhaps something else. So you don't have that luxury as you have with more slow paced RP.

Therefore it is in my opinion justifiable that if you suddenly or unprovoked get attacked and there's no notice of it happening like an initiation, even if it is just with fists you should always be able to defend yourself. And in general I think it is a bad idea to punch people with guns.

I understand that after the punch the dude was fair game by the rules and if we go down the realism route nobody would ever throw that punch, but honestly in the situation in that report most bandits that know how to RP would of pulled the gun up, aimed and said "what the fuck?" instead of getting another clip.  I've seen a lot of recent videos that are reminding me of the mod days, it brings a happy tear to my eye but I feel a lot of the current community dont want that direction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Roland said:

You're absolutely right, I am a huge fan of "eye for an eye" and having comparable level between action and re-action when it comes to hostilities.

You’re contradicting yourself.

1 hour ago, Roland said:

IAttacking with your bare fists someone holding a rifle, who also happens to have reinforcements around is pretty clear NVFL to me. Like it's literally worse than popular saying of "bringing a knife to a gun fight". He didn't even have a knife. 

You mean to tell me that the guy who has several allies in the immediate area with him who are all also armed, has no other option but to mow down the guy that punches him once and backs away immediately after punching him? 

And what about all those other verdicts linked on the matter that were basically the same and yet were verdicted the opposite of this one? 

Also, Dusty wasn’t alone and also had back up right there. Myself and three or four others watched the situation unfold. But since dynamic rights are kind of grey and not a very well constructed set of rules at all, we didn’t use our rights if we had any. 

Just seems way, way too convenient that he was denied amnesty appeal on the grounds of “Jus cuz lol” and then a verdict that is almost universally disagreed with is what gets him banned. 

Share this post


Link to post

I never liked dusty tbh, but this does seem to be B.S and poor rp on the side of the killers. IF they maybe thought about RP instead of PVP they would have been able to actually act out the situation and give some RP to the guy, maybe take his hand off or something. the kill wasn't RP in my opinion and if thats the standard of RP then im thoroughly disapointed

Share this post


Link to post

Well now if someone punches me, I'll just kill him directly. And if he reports me, not only will I be safe, but he will be ban.

Punching actually happens a lot in-game, more than some staff member think.

Its the second time I see "False Report" being thrown around when someone legitimely thought a rulebreak occured. Members are not staff members and don't have the same knowledge they do. Crazy to punish them for that.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Simatho said:

Well now if someone punches me, I'll just kill him directly. And if he reports me, not only will I be safe, but he will be ban.

Punching actually happens a lot in-game, more than some staff member think.

Its the second time I see "False Report" being thrown around when someone legitimely thought a rulebreak occured. Members are not staff members and don't have the same knowledge they do. Crazy to punish them for that.

It's not as simple as him punching and then getting killed, putting up a report on the person that shot him and then being banned for breaking rules. The fact that it was NVFL was because they were alone and one had an AR and the other had nothing. Had Dusty had friends with him and Scar was alone he could have punched him without it being NVFL. 

Punching happens a lot in-game that is very true, but that punching is in the right moment which is why there are no reports about them. 

As for the False report thing, it's clear NVFL. He's punching a guy who he is hostile with holding an AR. Knowing this he still put up a report

Share this post


Link to post

-

1 minute ago, NozzyRP said:

It's not as simple as him punching and then getting killed, putting up a report on the person that shot him and then being banned for breaking rules. The fact that it was NVFL was because they were alone and one had an AR and the other had nothing. Had Dusty had friends with him and Scar was alone he could have punched him without it being NVFL. 

Punching happens a lot in-game that is very true, but that punching is in the right moment which is why there are no reports about them. 

As for the False report thing, it's clear NVFL. He's punching a guy who he is hostile with holding an AR. Knowing this he still put up a report

Yes, I might have been generalising, you're right.

I still believe that such an action doesn't need to be punished. People resist in all kind of ways to an hostile person, and as long as there isn't an initiation, killing someone on sight should never be an option.

IMO

Share this post


Link to post

If you dont think this is NVFL you haven't been paying attention to the literature.

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Ron said:

-snip-

I am out of beanz, but have a big ol +1 from me

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Gaylaxy said:

If you dont think this is NVFL you haven't been paying attention to the literature.

The literature doesn't support killing someone over a single punch. As was stated in past reports. It specifically states 'hostile action that threatens your life.' Read it a bit closer. One light punch followed by immediately backing up with arms up to block is not a life threatening action.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Rover said:

The literature doesn't support killing someone over a single punch. As was stated in past reports. It specifically states 'hostile action that threatens your life.' Read it a bit closer. One light punch followed by immediately backing up with arms up to block is not a life threatening action.

The literature does state what I said, please read the literature.

Edited by Gaylaxy

Share this post


Link to post

Verdict should've been ruleplay, thereby absolving Dusty from any potential disregard for his own life, as one does not reasonably expect to die from a rulebreak. By extension, if Scar were to be found guilty, the false report verdict would also have to be thrown out for obvious reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, Gaylaxy said:

The literature does state what I said, please read the literature.

3.2 Your character must behave realistically and appropriately to the different situations you participate in, keeping the current world situation and context of post-apocalyptic world in mind. Do not act in a way that indicates no value for your characters life and survival. For example, attempting to kill people when heavily outnumbered, excessively talking back or insulting someone when taken hostage, or knowingly running into an area of active hostile engagement when not involved in the fight. Characters found guilty of breaking this rule will be permanently marked as dead.

 

Here is the literature covering NVFL. 

- He did not attempt to kill anyone when heavily out numbered.

- He was never taken hostage, so can't have been excessively talking back or insulting as no one initiated.

- He did not run into an area of active hostile engagement.

 

The only relevant line to your argument that I'm aware of is bolded, and that is subjective to situation and staff ruling. And as I stated above, in prior reports staff ruled a single punch as part of a hostile conversation to be roleplay, and not valid for someone to be SHOT, let alone killed. The literature does not support your stance, only a twisted interpretation of the literature does.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

What would happen to a CHDZK member If he punched an armed CDF soldier? 

What would happen to a rival gang member if he randomly punched the other gang whilst he's armed?

RP wise this makes sense this is not some random bloke on the streets but someone who actively tries to kill him and your telling me you'd put your gun on your back and punch back? Fuck no he'd be shot on the spot. 

This used to always grant rights so people wouldn't just randomly punch you for no reason, what changed? maybe if he's a hostage sure he would have had control over the situation but there he had none, no clue how many where around and seeing as he just assaulted him his actions were warranted.

Nihooliouse got banned for griefing, unless your referring to another case?

Edited by Eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Eagle said:

What would happen to a CHDZK member If he punched an armed CDF soldier? 

What would happen to a rival gang member if he randomly punched the other gang whilst he's armed?

He should be initiated on, taken hostage, and hostile roleplay should occur. As is the theme of this server.

 

He should not get instantly blasted.

 

EDIT: And it was /painfully clear/ in the video he was not trying to kill him. He threw a single punch, a light one at that, and immediately backed up.

Edited by Rover

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Rover said:

 

You're wrong, read the literature.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Rover said:

He should be initiated on, taken hostage, and hostile roleplay should occur. As is the theme of this server.

 

He should not get instantly blasted.

 

EDIT: And it was /painfully clear/ in the video he was not trying to kill him. He threw a single punch, a light one at that, and immediately backed up.

You ignore all points to agree with yours it's interesting. He committed a hostile act to someone he's enemies with he gained rights and used them on a person he saw as the bait of the crew dine and dash.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...