Taking snerts to court

[Delirium]

IC part:

I wound up on 2 jurries when I was out of the library last (ooc last night). The first was brought by a thoom who did indecent things to a poor sylvan and then wanted to force her to marry him! Other than to poof me from being fallen with the rest of my hunting party, this trial was the sort of thing I expect. For the second trial, well I was out hunting again, but I found that my hart was not in it, for I had noticed that Lilly was back in the lands! Yea!!! but I was not sure for how long and I was a little worried she might have just come back for a final hunt, so I really wanted to see her. When the summons came (we were out by the lake and it was a long way from town) I allowed myself to be poofed back so I could have a look for Lilly before sleeping on the books.....

OOC part:

The 2nd trial was a realtive newbie (newer even than myself, I think, snd who seem reasonably nice and I had hunted with earlier) taking "The Clown" to court for relentlessly BK bombing him. From what I have seen, "The Clown" was created solely to harass others (I have observed him doing the same to otheres and bragging about it). Since HWC (and I make an assumption here that it is a "He") the clown seems to get off on annoying others, I think the best policy is to ignore/block him, and would never give him the satisfaction of taking him to court. But the activities of snerts like this do lessen my own enjoyment of the game considerably, and The Clown was clearly upsetting the newbie (Pontagoras???? A thoom healer), which to my mind is the greatest crime of all. I take a very dim view of such harasment, and am concerned that targeting people in this way will drive nice people out of the lands. DT seems to turn a blind eye to this sort of thing, even though they may be loosing customers over it. If DT continues to keep their heads in the sand, I feel obligated to vote guilty in such trials, if only to let the victim know that such harrasment is viewed dimly. Well....

In the jury room, Tarf argued that BK bombing was not a crime and Aki supported him. So Tarf whines about rudeness from DT (which they were), but condones harassment by players of other players? I think rudeness from any source is offensive. In one of my first hunts, I was told not to heal a particular charater - one of the annoying "Cmdr" ones - because if I did, Tarf would leave the group. At the time, I felt very uncomfotable with this, but I had only just gotten my moonstone, so I could not really do anything in any case. But then the "Cmdr" fell and Tarf chained him off to the dark temple! It seems Tarf has a bit of a double standard when it comes to abuse directed at himself and abuse directed at others. I just want to have fun, but this whole thing has disturbed me more than a game should. I am bothered both by DT's refusal to deal with this kind of harassment and the selfish and uncompassionate attitude of HWC Tarf. I may need to take a break, or else just stay away from town.

But then there was good news.... Although I didn't meet up with Lilly, she did ss me and said she had returned to the lands!

[Farhope]

Hmm, several topics here, I will not touch them all:

1/ IC: Lilly is back!!?? sure!? yes? great! :-)

2/ Personnaly, I am very few in town [I suppose that as a healer, you are more in town then me, Delirium]. So I never met a snert behaviour (yes, never, or I have forgotten). So it is difficult for me to affirm something about this. I THINK that I would not ignore (ooc: I mean the command "/ignore") but I would not pay attention (role playing "ignore"): if it would be very annoying I will tell that to Compla. I don't think I will use the court: the court is what the snert want, he want attention, to be the center, ...
- btw I see I have use "he" and not "she/he" :-)
- I think that using the court is for something funny for everyone, or role playing, or for thieves (for example, Laroch)... not sure for the latter: if Laroch is a thief, ok to to court, if the player is "cheating", "abusing" the others PLAYERS, it is Compla.
So, for me, when it is a problem with the players not the characters it is for Compla

beware: I NEVER had to use the court or Compla, it is only what I suppose I would do.

3/ Behaviour of another player (Tarf). Hmm, with what you say, Delirium, yes, it seems that he prefers self-justice that means the justice of the stronger. Bad choice I think ... even if I suppose that he was not annoyed after that, but I would not be sure, the PLAYER of the other character could always make another character and annoy him... Hmm, maybe it would be funny (and he would be mad!) to sue him for that behaviour :-) oh yes, I would not do that (not enough fun I think), but I would use the court for that. Conclusion: I don't know when use the court or Compla :-)

[Sargon]

Hi

Lilly!!!!!!!! =) I hope it's true that you're back!

Ok.. :) Farhope: It seems to me that you know very well when to use Compla and when to use the court. I agree that using the court only makes sense when dealing with IC things. That said, I never used either of these things. While I do see snerts in town quite frequently I usually ignore them (not /ignore) and they seem to ignore me. That may not work if you're a well-known veteran though. (being incredibly weak can have its advantages! =)

The biggest problem I have with people acting like snerts or bk bombers is, that their motivation is completely ooc. Let me explain.. I also think that karma can't be misused ic. But if someone bk's (or gk's) someone else (bombing or not) for a completely OOC reason, then I have a problem. I personally would rather get 10 bk's from Prue than a single one from CmdrX. In Prue's case it would be a completely IC reason (and almost something to be proud of) but in CmdrX's case it would be for an OOC reason of a 12 year old. (no pun intended! =)

About Laroch: I've never met him in person as of yet, but I'm not sure whether he's really IC in his actions. I've no problem with him if he plays a thief. (although I dislike him IC for taking away Terra's stuff) But if his sole motivation is to get money and equipment for his main character and therefore is completely OOC, I have a problem. And the court won't do anything, since by the time he's convicted, his main char already has the stuff he stole anyway.. or he suicides Laroch and creates another char.

Sargon

[TerraHawk]

TerraHawk does no spend much time in town, mianly for the reason that there are snerts and annoyign people who spam and so on and so forth.

If TH does stay in town, then it's solely for the reason of meeting up with a hunting party, or for listening to Coriakin play his music. In those instances, I ignore everythign and everyone esle aroudn me, unless a specific question or comment is directed at me.

Sadly, my healer (who's name I shall not reveal, but most of you probably know him anyway), has to stay in town, which sometimes makes things difficult. Hence, why i onyl usually bring my healer out late at night my time. Less poeple are online, and town centre isn't as crowded.

Larloch, well, you all know my opinions about him now.

There's really nothing you can do if someone gives you BK for OOC reasons - TH got given BK once because I mentioned over the SS network that the people who lend you boats have always asked me for confirmation. Go figure. I make a comment regarding the current topic, and someone for some strange reason gets offended. No explanation given.

I'd prefer it that if someone gives you BK, then you should know who it came from. but that's my opinion.

HWC TH.

[Sargon]

Hi

When getting gk or bk, I prefer to get it for an ic reason. Whether the other exile includes a reason or not is not important for me. I see gk/bk as good/bad thoughts of someone else about me, and I usually don't get a reason if someone curses me in this other life of me. :)

What I don't understand is, that most people want a reason when getting bk but don't want one when getting gk. I guess what people are more interested in knowing from who they get it instead of the real reason.

Sargon

[Nugget]

Ok this is a hot subject for me. 1. In the trials I have been to people have used there ooc opion of other chars that where on trial so they had a biest view wich I think is very wrong. 2. The clan lord manual tells about evil characters some people just have a hard time playing that role I have ran into a few of these rp evil chars and I think they are fun and add more interest to the game even thoe I got a couple of bk which I don't like but am ok with it.I think the only time they should be dealt with ooc by delta tao is if the use ooc harrasment which bk is not. IC harrasment should be dealt with by puddlebians. Or better yet just /ignore them. If you take em to court it only makes them go after you more because they know they can get on your nerves. Any ways I have ton of things about the court system and the jurours that serve that I don't like and is discouraging to me. I have removed myself from jury duty for this reason.


Nugget

[Delirium]

With the courts: I have served on several juries and I filed one case (a whole month ago!) shortly after I came to the lands. The case I filed was completely IC - Malkor had the previous ooc day killed Bouncy, the blue bunny that started bouncing around town just before the rift opened. As most o you know, Delirium adopted the Bunny as her pet. Malkor was goading me, and saying things like "its not against the law" and dangling rabbit feet before me. I knew little about the court system at the time, but I knew I could file a case, so with Malkor goading, and Delirium being rather upset over the death or her pet (ooc, when malkor killed Bouncy, my ooc reaction went someting like - wow! cool! I didn't think it was even possible to hurt the bunny! oh.... wait.... Delirium would be mad as hell and deeply wounded by this. How am I going to RP this?) I decided that Delirium would atempt to get any recompense she could, and taking Malkor to court seemed to be the only option. Unfortunately for Delirium, while she acted on the spur of the moment, Malkor had obviously prepared. So Malkor got off. I did get some BK (annon) over this trial, and I was a little concerned that I would get BK bombed over it, but the total was only about 4, and I haven't gotten any BK since. IC Delerium feels a deep distrust of the puddleby courts now, and if the trial is IC, the precident be damned, Delirium will vote with her heart. The real problem is when trials get OOC overtones and OOC issues come up.

I'm not sure where this NPC people are talking about is, but I have heard that DT does not consider abusive BK bombing for no good IC reason to be a problem. Well, I think it is, and though I would choose to ignore it, I can sympathize with the frustation that might cause a newcommer in particular to take the abuser to court. It is abuse and makes the game un-fun. It's the sort of thing that may drive people out of the lands. DT seems to fail to recognize this, so, from the *rumors* I have heard (if anyone knows better please correct me), while this should be delt with via the OOC NPC, it will not be. I read about Larloch and see people have no trouble keeping this thief locked up via repeated trials. If someone wants to try to RP a thief, they can, but they should not be surprised when they are punished - it is completely IC. Relentless BK bombing for no good IC reason is as destructive to the Puddleby community as stealing IMHO, and should be punished as severely, if DT refuses to act. Yes, the best course is to ignore it or even wear it as a badge of honor (see quote Kiriel if fond of using ;-), but if some poor soul who doesn't know better is driven to take someone to court over undeserved ooc BK bombing, I will most likely vote guilty.

Oh, and Malkor *IS* in my oppinion, an example of an evil character. What kind of person asks to offer your bunny a carrot and then kills it? While deep down, Delirium will *NEVER* forgive him, as a player, it has added some interesting color to the game. (btw, I have a visionstone of some of the events described on Kira's scroll, including Malkor eating some grass like a good bunny).

[Nuvali]

[ Nuvali tries to keep his head from spinning, but doesn't think there is any hope. ]

Delirium, this is a wonderful topic you have started, but I think I'll take a couple days off before I actually *try* to approach it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Just because you're schizophrenic, doesn't mean your NOT Elvis."
- HWC Nuvali

[TerraHawk]

Umm, notice I said that I wanted to know who gave me BK.

I don't care about the reason (although that would be good), but I would like to know who gave my character BK so I could maybe talk to them one on one about it.

I know, it sounds silly. But it's how I think.

[Nuvali]

ooc:

All of these problems seem to come down to one thing: how to seperate ooc from ic, and when. The crappy part about that whole idea is that the two are much more entangled than most want to admit. Anyone that tells you *not* to take something personally are either looking for a cheap and easy way to help you solve the dillemma, or they are just very good at seperating the two, themselves. I think I have told a few people not to take something personally, and then turned right around and hypocritically got very annoyed or frustrated with something that just happened to me. That's the deal. You *have* to take the "bad" personally to some extent, otherwise you're just fooling yourself when you subsequently feel all of those more positive emotions of joy, accomplishment, etc.

Nevertheless, there is a safety net. It's called roleplaying, and although its not going to buffer everything, it can certainly help you catch those moments when you realize that maybe that last BK your character got "is not worth getting too upset about." Not to say that you shouldn't feel bad, but you need to ask yourself if *you* should feel bad for yourself, or for your character.

Now here's the kicker.... Unless you have friends in "your world" that play the game, nobody really knows who you are. They might know where you live, they might even know your name (if you volunteer that kind of information), but they don't really know you. And if they don't really *know* you, then you probably shouldn't be too concerned how they judge you as a person, because they CAN'T. How they judge your character is another matter, and the best way to avoid a personal attack is to roleplay a character that is alernative to your own.

I'll use Nuvali as an example. He's an old alcoholic who's not much good at doing anything except killing. Why is he an alcoholic? Because he has seen and done some things that he would rather forget about. He doesn't like to tell people what to do, and would rather see people learn from their own mistakes rather than condemn their actions. Now... about the only thing Nuvali and I share in common is that last part. I do like scotch during very special occassions, but the only drinking problem I have is a 6 pack of Mt. Dew a day. Believe it or not, right!!? lol... It's always a good laugh when people start "assuming" that HWC Nuvali must be a drunk. Of course, if they want to make those sorts of assumptions, they are also welcome to believe that HWC Nuvali can take on ten pit bulls with a spork from Taco Bell. Ain't happening, folks.

Back to BK. People that use BK to teach a lesson, but don't explain the reason behind the BK, need to take more classes in teaching. People that use BK to "punish" misdeeds, are punishing misdeeds the best way they know how. But be very careful when you assume that it is the HWC or SWC that is giving you the karma. That's a dangerous path towards feeling personally attacked and judged, and it's something that you can easily avoid. Try to keep in mind that the sender of the BK was CharacterX, not necessarily HWC/SWC of CharacterX, and that the target of that BK was not HWC/SWC your character, but your character alone. That's how you have to approach it because otherwise you are just reaffirming that that person on the other end of the screen suddenly *knows* you personally. Chances are they don't.

Snerts:
I don't have much of an opinion about them. They can't hurt me if I don't let them, and they can't take my money if I don't let them. I wish I could say the same thing about giant swarms of vermine, or those pesky spriggins that pick my pockets. ;-)

As far as harassment goes, if it's IC then deal with it appropriately (i.e. invite them to the Badlands, gut them, and feed 'em to the kitties in the south west corner--not necessarily in that order). If it's OOC harassment then let Joe know, move on, and try not to let them spoil your fun.

[Konoko]

Hi

Delirium you said "I'm not sure where this NPC people are talking about is". Were you talking about Compla (the NPC Farhope mentioned)?

I believe Compla is in the town hall (the place where you can reveal your race). Someone please correct me if I'm mistaken.

I have no idea what Compla does. I've never talked to her but I'm betting that she'll keep a list of the names people tell her. Then I guess these names will get passed on to delta tao?


Is this how it works?

Konoko

[Althus]

Compla records everything someone says and does for 20 minutes after a complaint is registered, then logs it to a file. The GMs read that file once in a while and deal with problem-people.

[Lilly]

For every one person who can use BK to positive effect, there are a dozen (at least) who would use it to a negative one. The most responsible decision I can see being reached on BK is to either educate those who misuse it (a very difficult, unlikely prospect), or let those few who use it justly agree to give up their right to it, and remove it from the game. BK is like any weapon - it may protect you, but on most occasions it will be protecting you from someone else using the same weapon as you. If that weapon hadnt been invented in the first place, the chance you would have needed its protection at all would be far less likely - if you disarm a person, they are far more likely to find a different answer to their problems then fighting. I am willing to let it be eradicated if it means it will be misused no farther.

Arteress Lai

[Nuvali]

Would you be willing to eradicate good karma in the process, Lilly?

[Nunul]

It's hard for myself as a character to just "look away" when I recieve BK, and not let it get to me as some GMs think one should. I believe in at least two in-game effects that karma has on a character. That effect is the length of time spent in purgatory. Another one which has little bearing on my life on the islands, the old and crabby farmer in the undine hut. While HIS oppinion may not seem like much, it makes me question whether or not there may be a deeper effect that karma has (not unlike the fear that I have of departing too much which was instilled by HGM). Until a GM can assure me that BK has NO effect on anything (and is just a tally of opinions of others), I will continue to get majorly irate at random and anonomous BK.

IMHO: BK cannot be adequately constructive if it remains anonomous.

-HWC for STILL the ONLY Windy Dorf

[Nuvali]

If you get rid of anon BK, you have to get rid of anon GK. You just can't have one without the other. But why is there even the "option" for either? I look at karma as an intangible thing--call it an emotion or vibe, but it's not a one-way deal. The personality of the sender can often be reflected by the manner in which they give good or bad karma. For example, let's say you are with a large group of people and someone gives you anonymous good karma. That person could have chosen to elevate themselves in your eyes by making it obvious that they were the person who gave the karma, or they could just give you the karma anonymously because of something nice that you did. In my eyes, that is the most noble way to give good karma (anonymously), because you--the giver--aren't getting anything (i.e. recognition of your kindess) from the act. It's sort of like those stories you hear about someone anonymously donating $1 million to a charity, and in essence, not taking any credit for it. Those are the highest forms of giving (imho).

Switch it around for BK. The notion is almost reversed. Instead of affirming your unselfish goodness like you do when giving anonymous good karma, you are reaffirming your cowardness by giving anon bad karma. The recipient of the karma is not only affected, but the sender, in turn, also affirms their own personality in the process. Now... granted, that's all intangible stuff, and I don't have a clue how the level of good karma vs. bad affects a character's options in the game. And I'm pretty sure that the effect on the sender doesn't really exist as far as impacting the game (although it would be cool if it did--but then again, everyone would just use anon GK and non-anon BK). Nevertheless, until we are given a definate means of measuring the effects of gk and bk on the game, I tend to treat both as what I *think* they should mean: that karma should impact you as a character/player, but impact you in ways that are too difficult to calculate. Seriously...who's to say that there are certain benefits to having more gk than bk? Who's to say that there aren't certain benefits to having more bk than gk? Does it matter? Are you going to play any differently? It would be a pretty boring CL world if everyone started behaving the same way to get some "great" thing after getting a certain number of intanglibe somethings. Then again, I don't have a clue... and that's when I realize that I should stop worrying/thinking about it. I feel good when I get good karma. I feel like crap when I get bad karma. Sounds about how it should work.

One last thing. Try to keep in mind that all of the rumored effects of bad karma might just be there to accentuate the paranoia--vice vi--"bad" in bad karma. Hats off to DT for effectivelyadding the element of superstition. ;-)

[Lilly]

I see absolutely no reason at all why good karma would cease to function if bad karma was removed. Good Karma works as it should - an effective little pat on the back. Clan Lord is based largely on little pats on the back, at least in my experiences. Having GK adds alot to the feel of the game. Bad Karma, in its current form, does not. You can see it in how people swear and curse when they recieve them, in how how a person can walk out of the library having not said a word to anyone, and recieve three in less then 10 seconds (not an exaggeration, as it once happened to me), and in how people repeatedly sunstone "please, if you must BK me, at least let me know why." the one time i sent out a bad karma, I tried to use it to postive effect - i gave a lengthy, polite explanation as to why i sent it, in hopes it would make the person realize how offensive they were being. the response BK i recieved involved several choice 4 letter words, and then i was informed that I was obviously a person who had not played for more then 2 weeks, so i should go "four leter word" myself some more. (funny that, i couldve sworn i'd been playing for months! and hadnt been four-letter wording myself at all!). I have not sent one out since. I am all for balancing things out with opposites, but I think the scales will weigh much better if BK was gone then it does left in.

Arteress Lai

[Delirium]

A few things:

I saw a post from one of the senior players in the NG to the efect that someone was BK bombing from the CHARACTER GENERATION area (from wich one can apparently not be taken to court) and that despite repeated prayers and emails, Delta Tao had done nothing. I myself have made the suggestion that BK giving beturned off until ones nebie clothes fade, which would help end this type of completely OOC abuse.

Also, from what I understand, karma does have real effects in the game. I have heard that people with better karma get better prices on sunstons. Thus, BK bombing a character does hurt that character in game terms, if this is correct.

The more I think about it, the more I agree with Lilly. There are few people who use BK constructively or cleverly, and many do feel it as a personal attack. Delirium is not me, but I put a bit of myself into her and I find I care what happens to her. On the whole, I think the game would be improved by eliminating BK (but keeping GK).

The trouble is, as the doctor point out, it isn't our sandbox. DT and the GMs make the rules. At times, HGM in particular, seems very immature. HGM seems more intested in attacking people for using spades for things more creative than digging simple holes than in keeping bullies from kicking sand in other peoples eyes.

[Nuvali]

ooc:

I think the only reason that DT doesn't want to prohibit new exiles from using karma (of any sort) is because it's insulting.

There's enough marginalism that comes from walking off the boat without telling new exiles that their ability to give good or bad karma will be put on hold until they have....what? Until they have matured in some abstract, time-determined fashion? I just don't think that would taste good for any character/player. From my own observations, this game attracts some of the kindest, most intelligent people I have seen in a game. Would it really be worth it to limit the vast majority of new players who arrive with sensible intentions because of the ills of a very small few?

Finally...I really want to ask this: how can you have good karma without bad? How does that whole package make sense with the subtraction of either?

[Lilly]

I think we are looking at Karma in 2 very different perspectives, Nuvali. It appears to me that you are looking at it as representative of broad philosophical ideas, and I am looking at it in pure effectiveness of game terms. In the philosophical sense, you cannot have one without the other, since each relies on the other to help define its meaning. in the game, GK and BK rely on the programming to define them.And it is my opinion that the bad karma half is not programmed very well.From the repeated complaints I have heard, I have drawn the conclusion that BK detracts from the game's universal fun more then adds to it. And when the point is to have fun, the un-fun parts get fixed to enhance the fun, or axed. I, personally, am not looking for a magical candyland where things never go wrong in my gaming experiences (far from it, in fact). But I would prefer it if those who were trying to be cruel, evil, or spiteful would have to work at it a bit to accomplish it - the creativity used in doing so would then enhance the gaming world for all.

Arteress Lai

[T'rr'll]

You can only give out GC if you have it to give. Maybe DT should give characters BC to give out at the same rate they give the character GC to give out. You can't GC bomb someone, why should you be able to BC bomb someone? <g>

P.S. Hi everyone :-)

[Nuvali]

Yep, you got me Lilly. I am looking at it as a representation of a broader philosophical idea, because that is what the karma system is in CL--a representation of a broader philosophical idea.

But I must be missing something. Am I understanding you correctly--that you want more creativity required to be evil, and stricter constraints on the actual game functionality of evilness (aka limiting bad karma)?

There is no PvP allowed (unless it's consentual in the arena or bandlands). You can't steal anyone's money or items. And the only thing that bk seems to affect is the price of sunstones. But you want even less capacity to be "bad"? I'm sorry, but this widespread demand that evil characters need to be more creative smacks of contradiction, especially when you want to take away one more "tool" that they (they being bad characters) can use. And then the argument commences that (I'm just paraphrasing what I have heard over the past 2 years), "DT should get rid of bk or anon bk because those who use it aren't using it fairly, or creatively, or...sensibly." Since when did all evil characters become sensible, or creative, or fair? Why do evil characters become legitimately "evil" only after they meet some abstract critieria determined by other players? It sort of goes against the entire notion of what it means to be bad, doesn't it?

Yes, there is a difference between a character who plots diabolically and intelligently from the shadows, and an annoying imp who yells profanities to every passerby, but both are characters, and even though they might range in depth, and even though one might have the superficiality of a gnat, and even though they might not add to your fun, they are still participants who are engaging the CL world in a manner they see fit. Do people who play shallow evil characters add to the CL universe? I personally don't know. Are those who bk bomb other players for no rational explanations worth the spit in our mouths? Probably not. But, I think, before we start demanding more creativity from certain "bad players", the "good players" should also get creative in trying to solve the problem in-game. I mean... it's sort of hypocritical to demand more creativity from those who wreak havoc on our karma without broaching the issue creatively, as well. Of course, that probably just sounds like more empty philosophy that really won't impact the effectiveness of the game for you.

If DT got rid of bk tomorrow, I probably wouldn't care. Like I've said before (and I think we actually agree on this point), getting bk is not fun. But, here's my list of other un-fun things. Maybe we could appeal to DT and the GMs to get rid of (or change) these, as well:

1) Laying fallen for more than 30 minutes
2) Not being able to depart. I haven't experienced this first hand, but after reading Cradlesong's experience in TK, it sounds like it would be at the top of my list of "un-fun" things.
3) Nuvali not being able to find a suitable supplier of scotch in Puddleby (this one is way up there on my list ;-)
4) Nuvali running out of scotch in the middle of a hunt (see #3).
5) Getting surrounded by a swarm of vermine and falling.

Now... here's my list of fun things (to be fair)
1) Getting surrounded by a swarm of vermine and getting out by the skin of my teeth.
2) Hunting with good friends.
3) Hunting with new friends.
4) Debating with Lilly about "un-fun" things. (Next good karma is for you, dear lady ;-)


[Edited by Nuvali on 05-09-2001 at 04:59 PM]

[Kiriel]

T'rr'll, actually you can GK bomb, and folks do it, just not as often. I've received GK bombs a few times when chaining folks at DP. It's just that nobody ever complains about being GK bombed :) You get 1 karma every 5 min or so and you can use it for GK or BK, it's totally up to you, so each is just as bombable.

[TerraHawk]

I took larloch to court today for harrasment.

It was a good outcome. 209 minutes jail time and 10 days banishment form the town.

For more information see Volume 01 Issue 03 of "Whispers of the Breeze".

[tovemi]

I never take snerts to court for ooc reasons, simply because it`s a waste of time. My time, and the jury`s time. Only when the action and the reaction can be justified IC. It will not change their behaviour at all, but will give them the attention they crave. I just hit /ignore.

If it`s harassment that goes on for a long period of time,or sexual harassment, I would use Compla instead.

Court to me is a roleplaying tool, and as such , it`s quite alright that the jury can be bribed or whatever. You just have to be able to outbid your opponent;)

Regarding karma, I`ll point you to http://red-quill.com/babajaga/swc/karma.html where I have written a longer rant about the subject, but in short - all karma is ok. It`s just the current use of it that`s not. Meaning, I think players are too hung up in the karma system, and should use it more than they do, not less.

Bad karma is a bad thought, good karma is a good thought. Bad karma is like someone saying Damn you. Nothing more, nothing less. And it has nothing to do with your characters long term reputation, it has more to do with how the world sees your character right now.

My 2c:)

tovemi

[Delirium]

Note: This *is* the ooc forum, which is good, beacuse this post is completely ooc.

I (Delirium's clicker) agree with tovemi, but only up to a point. In general, it is best to ignore snerts - if they get a rise out of you, they will never go away. I also think we should be giving karma (particularly GK) more. For example, if you are having a good time hunting with a group, I think you should be GKing the members of the group.

But my original post was about what to do when a snert has gone after someone, probably a newbie, and driven them so nuts with BK bombing, etc., that the newbie takes the snert to court. Said newbie may not know that "BK bombing" is considered by many not be a crime, but "Herrasment" is. What I was saying I would do in such a situation was to find the snert guilty. I think finding the snert innocent will encourage the snert to be more snertish than finding them guilty.

I also find that I have a philosophical disagreement with what Tovemi says. Karma is what people think of a character, but it *is* also more than that. Fourth circles don't really need to worry much about Karma - getting enough coins for a sun stone isn't much of a problem. However, a few coins can be a much bigger issue to a newbie, and Karma does have other real effects on the game. I hear that there are Karma requirements to even entering some occupations. In short, BK does real harm to characters in the game. Given this, I view BK bombing without cause as an IC crime. (Note: a single BK given in admonishment does not constitue bombing :)

What Larloch did was act the part of a thug, and, though I despise what he did, I give the player some credit for attemping to play an evil character. But communities that depend on co-operation for survival tend to take a dim view of thugs. I kind of hope Larloch will continue to try to play a thug and continue to get thrown in jail, if only as an example to others. And I will say again, that I feel the random BK bombers are just as much thugs as Larloch.

One final thought.... I am not sure exactly what Prue does, but it sounds like she curses people for hire. This sounds like it is role-playing, and her targets are generally well-known characters. I don't really have a problem with this, although I do think it would be reasonable to take her to court over cursing people in an IC context (a witch trial :-). What is really bothering me is the newbie baiting in which I've seen some snerts engaging. It is the sort of thing that drives paying costomers away, and should, IMHO, be of concern to all of us who want the game to continue (my initial 2 months will soon be up, but I have signed up for another year :).

[Nuvali]

I hope this doesn't come off too brash, but here goes....

It's a rough chunk of rock this Puddleby island can be. When stepping off the boat, a new exile should be assured of one thing: if the thugs (or snerts or whatever) don't cut you down, the assortment of wildlife will. The only difference is that you can *ignore* the snerts. My only recommendation, if you see a new exile being harrassed in a snertish fashion, is to remind them of their options (i.e. the ignore feature, court, Compla, etc.), and then try to reassure them that the vast population of this cruel rock isn't *so* cruel (hence, a good lead-in to your sales pitch about WoD ;-).

There is a danger in putting too much energy into combating snertishness--the first of which is using the word "snertishness" in a sentence (lol). Seriously, the more attention you give snerts, the more legitimacy you hand them on a silver platter. Ignore. Ignore. Ignore.

Finally, if a player (I'm not talking about the character) persistantly allows snertish assaults (or anything of the sort) to seriously affect their own self-confidance, and/or capacity to have fun, then they probably need to find another game.

[tovemi]

I , or rather the character I play, have taken characters to court for harassing newlings. It

[TerraHawk]

justa point of note, when larloch stoel Terra's shield and Axe, I could nto take him to court brcause he kept logging off whenever I logged on.

So I switched to my healer, waited for him to turn up, and others sued him on Terra's behalf as I logged my healer off and brought Terra on to attend the court proceeding and be a witness.

Terra has no reason to drag Larloch back to court unless he does something else to bother Terra, like when he was pushing Terra in town centre for no reason.

Terra was lucky that Slyph was pushed by him too, because then I had a witness, and wasn't just a simple case of revenge.

[Delirium]

Babajaga's clicker's latest response exhibits exactly the attitude I found troubling in the case I was on. A newbie was being harrased and BK bombed by a snert, and took snert to court for "BK bombing" - some of the established players said snert was guilty of harrasment, but BK bombing was not a crime, so found the snert innocent. In cases like this, I consider it a waste of everyones time to insist that the *correct* charge be filed. And Nuvali, after the snert is found innocent (or worse, the newbie is found frivoulus), it is very hard to convince the newbie that most of the people on the island are not nasty SOB's. Such a verdict by the jury appears to condone the actions of the snert.

I think we all agree that it is better that the newbie be counciled in the options before any charges are filed and encouraged to just ignore the snert. But there isn't always someone there to give the newbie advice, so we will likely contnue to have cases where a newbie is baited into charging a snert. I will continue to vote guilty in such cases. But if the person bringing the case for "BK bombing" is an established player, well, I may expect more creative solutions from established players.

[Nuvali]

<i>"And Nuvali, after the snert is found innocent (or worse, the newbie is found frivoulus), it is very hard to convince the newbie that most of the people on the island are not nasty SOB's."</i>

Are you talking about newbies as in characters, or newbies as in players? If a player decides to play a character that decides he/she wants to interpret the Puddlebian community as a misguided and inept society because he/she feels wronged by a court case--that is one thing. That's fun. That's roleplaying. But if you're talking about players, then what I am going to say probably won't sound very nice.

If a (any) <b>player</b> interprets a court's reaction as an irrefutable generalization of the entire body politic of clickers, then that tells me one or more of the following: a) the player probably doesn't understand some basic roleplaying concepts; and/or b) is more willing to narrow their focus on a couple functionality issues rather than approach the game in a broader, more creative fashion; and/or c) the player is still learning how to seperate the clickers from the characters.

In other words, I'm not very interested in players who are going to hold a grudge against the game and/or the entire CL community of players based on a make-believe court case. Again, don't get me wrong. I'm not talking about characters, here. If a player rp's someone who becomes disgruntled over the scenario you referenced, then I'll gung-ho play along. But if a player (in an ooc fashion) starts complaining about the CL community of players based on such events, then I'll probably just walk away until they figure out that it's just a game, and they should play it accordingly. I know that tovemi has said in the past that it's not just a game, but that it is a community, as well. Yes. Agreed. Both. It's a community of people playing a game. But if a player wants to enjoy the best of both of worlds, then they better be prepared to seperate the two when the situation requires. Otherwise, that player will make the sad mistake of assuming that the actions of all characters represent the ideology of those who play them. And that's a dangerous track to ride on.

Finally, I want to address your issue regarding tovemi and "the attitude" that troubles you. I think this issue has popped-up several times, lately, about the distinction in attitude between newer players and more veteran players. I'm not going to use the phrase "more experienced" because that notion is flagrantly skewed and often completely false. Nevertheless, most people who have played CL for at least a year have already digested issues like these. They've made up their minds about how they are going to personally handle them, and most likely, will have created their own boundaries as players and as characters.

I have watched at least two friends become emotional wrecks playing this game. I have seen one very good friend nearly destroy his real-life relationship with his significant other after establishing an in-game relationship that was originally just supposed to be "roleplaying." I'm sure that many (if not most) players who have been around for a couple years can share similar experiences or stories. And it is precisely those experiences that force you to draw a line in the sand about how far you--as a player (and maybe even as a character)--are willing to take this. Granted, some lines are blurrier or more defined than others, but over time, each player does discover what is worth worrying about, and what is just plain frivolous.

Speaking from my own experience, the moment I drew my line in the sand, was the moment the game *really* opened-up for me. It was a refreshing revelation. My boundaries were set, and from that point on, I could spend more time enjoying the game, instead of concentrating on issues that weren't worth a synaptic spark.

Please don't misinterpret what I am saying, Delirium. There is a very good chance that I argued the exact same points that you did, not too long ago. There is also a very good chance that I received reactions that appeared very similar to the one I am giving right now. There is also a very good chance that at that point in time, I felt that those reactions were patronizatng and insensitive. But it only took the few occassions that I previously hinted at to understand that if I want to enjoy this game, and not walk away from it an emotional wreck (or worse), then I really need to judge certain things as "frivolous", both in-character and out of character. Of course, once in a rare while, something pokes me like an unexpected, low-lying branch, and annoys/frustrates/saddens me, personally. And those are the moments when I make a mad dash for the library, and don't come out until I've completely reestablished my boundaries, again.

<i>"I will continue to vote guilty in such cases. But if the person bringing the case for "BK bombing" is an established player, well, I may expect more creative solutions from established players."</i>

But what will you do if it's a newer exile being clicked by an experienced player, or vice versa? Will you be able to tell the difference? And how will you react if you become privy to that information?