An Interesting Problem

[Itzzaboy]

and rerail, yes.

 

[Faelin]

And what, me for philosopher? Who doesn't get paid but is forced to work and only sleeps and hour a night and is not aloud to cry?

*allowed

Anyway, slight re-rail...

It seems to me that, particularly with official groups involving enforcement of certain policies, we have a choice between harsher/more realistic consequences, resulting in improved reactions and responses in RP, with some complaints and rule-breakers, OR milder punishments/enforcements, resulting in people taking advantage of these groups in RP (and unrealistically so), with no complaints.

Personally, I'd prefer to have the first; better RP with some people getting it wrong rather than passable RP with a constant fault in the system.

 

[Rextoret]

It seems to me that, particularly with official groups involving enforcement of certain policies, we have a choice between harsher/more realistic consequences, resulting in improved reactions and responses in RP, with some complaints and rule-breakers, OR milder punishments/enforcements, resulting in people taking advantage of these groups in RP (and unrealistically so), with no complaints.

I'd go with the first. I'd prefer more strict rules with some complaints than less strict with people taking advantage of these.

 

[Faelin]

I'd go with the first. I'd prefer more strict rules with some complaints than less strict with people taking advantage of these.

Precisely.

 

[MRPolo13]

Seems like all my remarks have been stated beforehand on here, I'll just sit back and watch xD

 

[Faelin]

Better get out the popcorn dude, it's no doubt going to be fun to watch.

*cues Mich's many, many popcorn gifs*

 

[Itzzaboy]

*cues Mich's many, many, many popcorn gifs*

Fixed it for you.

 

[MRPolo13]

All I'd have to say is "Burn them all... and don't let them escape without a decent reason for God's' (That's like, God IRL and Gods IG?) sakes..."

 

[Spark]

I believe the word you're looking for is infinite.

I believe said word is rerail >.>

 

[Rextoret]

Perhaps. My tea just finished and is ready to be drank, let's do this.

 

[Faelin]

I believe said word is rerail >.>

Oh, my... So ironic coming from you, my friend. *brofists*

But yes... Perhaps official organisations should have different permissions to guilds and the like?

 

[Itzzaboy]

You play a good game Kaiba, but your Blue Eyes is no match for my supreme monster...

Come forth... RERAILOSAURUS!

 

[Rextoret]

Was wondering what the reference was, haven't watched Yu-gi-oh in years. but let's re-rail for good now.

*commence someone posting a long-winded descriptive post*

 

[Itzzaboy]

Just a simple reference not matched a particular scene, not any part of it.

You guessed the Yu-gi-oh! part, that was all that was needed.

 

[Itzzaboy]

*twiddles thumbs whilst waiting for someone to post something on-topic*

Or am I going to have to write something now?

It's your move, Kaiba...

*ba dum tsh*

 

[Faelin]

*commence someone posting a long-winded descriptive post*

Hmm...
Well, perhaps rather than ranking organisations, they could be divided according to purpose?
For example, official "enforcement" type organisations such as the Silvercloaks, the Kingsguard and the Inquisition might have different OOC rules and rights to "rebellion" types, that break or go against some sort of law or movement. Similarly there might be passive organisations, such as artisans, travelling entertainers, or crafting guilds that could fall under another catergory. Groups that are intended to reach a political or social goal (for example the Slayers and the Golden Crusade), or those directly affiliated with a noble House might have entirely different allowances entirely to keep everything fair.

Thoughts?

 

[Rextoret]

It's your move, Kaiba...

*ba dum tsh*

Me? Duel you? I'd have more of a challenge playing solitaire.

 

[SobekRa]

To be honest, I dislike the ideas that emerged during the discussion. They are harsh, restrictive, and focus on fighting the syptoms instead of the cause. Nobody likes to be punished, and the idea of punishment alone can greatly reduce the lust of people to roleplay at all. Besides, it would most likely encourage the creation of RP-groups in which the players can behave the way they like without the fear of prosecution.
I suggest making higher standards for roleplay instead enforcing a punishment. Higher standards overall will solve this problem more efficient than punishment, since people will have to adjust themselves to the standards.

 

[Itzzaboy]

Me? Duel you? I'd have more of a challenge playing solitaire.

+10 awesome points

 

[Rextoret]

Hmm...
Well, perhaps rather than ranking organisations, they could be divided according to purpose?
For example, official "enforcement" type organisations such as the Silvercloaks, the Kingsguard and the Inquisition might have different OOC rules and rights to "rebellion" types, that break or go against some sort of law or movement. Similarly there might be passive organisations, such as artisans, travelling entertainers, or crafting guilds that could fall under another catergory. Groups that are intended to reach a political or social goal (for example the Slayers and the Golden Crusade), or those directly affiliated with a noble House might have entirely different allowances entirely to keep everything fair.

Thoughts?

Seems legit. I really like the the grouping groups idea. Giving different privileges to certain types of organizations is a good idea.