Just a Thought

[EastBowmen]

So a week ago I got in trouble for "Pvp Logging" on an alternate account. While looking over the rules (for about the 20th time) I noticed that I didn't exactly qualify for the Pvp Log rule. As you can see below it says don't log out in the middle of PvP or while running away from another player. I had not made any contact in pvp and the player who I "Pvp Logged" to was running at me. I was not running away nor was I running in the middle of PvP so therefor I didn't break any rules. Not looking to get unbanned, but I noticed that I shouldn't have necessarily received the punishment that was given. Js you should probably add, "or to avoid combat." into the "Don't Pvp Log" section of the rules.
11. Don't PvP Log
11.1. Don't log out in the middle of PvP or while running away from another player.

 

[Cryptite]

We'll amend the rules for clarification, but, yes, we still rule it PvP logging if you log out to avoid an incoming fight. We've temped several people lately for this exact same situation.

 

[Kobeyador]

So a week ago I got in trouble for "Pvp Logging" on an alternate account. While looking over the rules (for about the 20th time) I noticed that I didn't exactly qualify for the Pvp Log rule. As you can see below it says don't log out in the middle of PvP or while running away from another player. I had not made any contact in pvp and the player who I "Pvp Logged" to was running at me. I was not running away nor was I running in the middle of PvP so therefor I didn't break any rules. Not looking to get unbanned, but I noticed that I shouldn't have necessarily received the punishment that was given. Js you should probably add, "or to avoid combat." into the "Don't Pvp Log" section of the rules.
11. Don't PvP Log
11.1. Don't log out in the middle of PvP or while running away from another player.

I know this issue has be resolved, the rules have been amended, and the server owner made a decision on the occasion, but I thought I would through in my thoughts XP. I am one who is against Punishments on rules that are not posted on the official rules post, but to log out to avoid someone damaging you ,IMO, would have fallen under {4.3. Do not log out to avoid damage or to access floors above you. (Don't log jump)}. This might be a stretch for rules current to the time of the tempban, but logging out with the intent to avoid anything other then a glitched occurrence damaging you, would technically be a Log jump, IMO.
Edit: I don't agree with logging out to avoid a fight and only thing different I would have done was ruled it as Log jumping until the rule 11.1 was implemented.

We'll amend the rules for clarification, but, yes, we still rule it PvP logging if you log out to avoid an incoming fight. We've temped several people lately for this exact same situation.

I believe rule 11.1. is definitely needed. However, the phrase "...to avoid an incoming fight)..." would required guardians and sentries to gather a little more situational information then usual before issuing a punishment. I.E. If a player logs off for the night with no knowledge of an impending attack, because of a low render distance, would not mean the player intentionally logged out to avoid a fight.
My main concern would be proof that the player had the intent to avoid pvp or had knowledge that the log would effect the outcome of a imminent/occurring conflict .

 

[MasterAegon]

Things are not always black and white. In your situation, you were being monitored closely and that's why punishment was given. The same goes for X_Cavator and streetz. Rest assured that punishment is swift when there's sufficient cause. Some things rely on a set of eyes being on the particular event. Others we can track different means.

Just because someone says 'oh I had low render so I left' doesn't mean their intentions weren't clearly otherwise. What it boils down to is determination by administrators to take action, and that's something that is necessary. None make decisions without confirmation or good cause.

 

[adderman500]

As always we never just ban someone immediately if it looks like they broke a rule. Since it's a fairly rare thing we can deal with each case individually and try and find out what actually happened and how. The rules are guidelines and set out the basics of what is or isn't allowed, but every situation is different and it's up to us admins to figure out what to do in each individual case.

 

[Kobeyador]

......The rules are guidelines and set out the basics of what is or isn't allowed, but every situation is different and it's up to us admins to figure out what to do in each individual case.

Edited: Though, English was never my favorite subject, I thought that there was a difference between the definitions of rules and guidelines. I always understood guidelines as suggestions or recommendations for procedures.
IMO, rules should be black and white. However, judging rules that have been broken should follow guidelines to find the severity of the offense to be able to determine the severity of the punishment.

Just because someone says 'oh I had low render so I left' doesn't mean their intentions weren't clearly otherwise. What it boils down to is determination by administrators to take action, and that's something that is necessary. None make decisions without confirmation or good cause.

You misunderstood what I was trying to say and turned my example into a counter argument that is irrelevant. ''oh I had low render so I left'' is not even close to my example. My example was stating "If a player was to log out without knowing that there is an attacker closing in on him, would he be subject to pvp logging". I, for example, have my render distance set on 2. If someone with a render distance of 15 was to see me and starts to charge me as I am logged out. They could easily think I logged out because of them.I could be accused/punished of pvp logging without even knowing what took place. That is why I said....

However, the phrase "...to avoid an incoming fight)..." would required guardians and sentries to gather a little more situational information then usual before issuing a punishment.

My main concern would be proof that the player had the intent to avoid pvp or had knowledge that the log would effect the outcome of a imminent/occurring conflict .

Just as an example can be misinterpreted, a series of events can be misinterpreted.

 

[adderman500]

I'm confused here Kobe. The last two quotes you put in the above post suggest that you don't think there should be black and white rules, yet the first two points you make suggest there should. "Situational information" is irrelevant if the person logs out avoiding pvp be it intentional or not, if rules are 100% black and white. In fact, if we take that idea that rules should be black and white and apply it to real life, which I suppose would be a justice system we strive to replicate in terms of fairness and what have you it would be ridiculous. Imagine if people were punished straight up according to the offence they committed rather than going through court etc. That would not be an effective system and would involve the wrong punishments being dished out arbitrarily in the majority of cases.

TL;DR black and white ruling would be stupid and wouldn't allow for an effective punishment of players. If that's what you are looking for from the admin team Kobe, I'm sorry but we simply won't offer that.

 

[Kobeyador]

I believe rule 11.1. is definitely needed. However, the phrase "...to avoid an incoming fight)..." would required guardians and sentries to gather a little more situational information then usual before issuing a punishment.

I am saying that "to avoid an incoming fight" the player would have to know about an incoming fight. If the player didn't know someone was coming after them (and were not previously in a battle) then they would not be avoiding a fight by logging out. If he knew he was being attacked then he broke the rule(black). If he didn't know there was an incoming attack then he didn't break a rule(white).
That is why I am concerned about that phrase. Admins would have to figure out if the player knew or not to be able to be fair.

 

[Cryptite]

It's pretty obvious when you're avoiding a fight because someone who knows a fight is coming will have visibly seen the person and then either insta-logged or attempted to run then log. This is easy to spot when we're watching the whole thing go down.

 

[Kobeyador]

It's pretty obvious when you're avoiding a fight because someone who knows a fight is coming will have visibly seen the person and then either insta-logged or attempted to run then log. This is easy to spot when we're watching the whole thing go down.

That is completely understandable. However, unless you have a guardian watching the entire thing, you most likely wont be able to make a decisive decision.

....What it boils down to is determination by administrators to take action, and that's something that is necessary. None make decisions without confirmation or good cause.

If no guardian witnesses what happened and someone claims someone else pvp logged, then I am concerned that the chat messages and admin tools available would not provide enough infomation.

However, the phrase "...to avoid an incoming fight)..." would required guardians and sentries to gather a little more situational information then usual before issuing a punishment.

O.K let me describe it a different way....Admin abuse is a big issue dealing with false claims.Be it that the player truely believes their claim is legit or if they are trolling. I am concerned that pvp logging would present the opportunity for one player to claim false pvp log on another player just as easily as a player can shout admin abuse. Of course you can monitor every detail an admin does through commands and the console. However, I am concerned that proving a legit pvp log would be more difficult if there is no guardian that saw exactly what happened.

 

[Cryptite]

No admin has ever banned anybody for PvP logging that wasn't watching it in the first place. We don't handle PvP logging through participant claims; only through our own eyes. That's all that needs to be said about this.

 

[Ronshaud]

Also if you didn't notice, Admins watch all fights that go down. Especially Tgen fights!

 

[Kobeyador]

Also if you didn't notice, Admins watch all fights that go down. Especially Tgen fights!

lol I didn't notice..... other then helping test the tgens I have yet to be in a fight for a tgen.

My main concern would be proof that the player had the intent to avoid pvp or had knowledge that the log would effect the outcome of a imminent/occurring conflict .

We don't handle PvP logging through participant claims; only through our own eyes.

That's definitely enough proof to quell my concerns.