PKingable People

[Inglor]

I would like to see a vote taken once a month on 1 person that can be made PKingable for a week. The choses would come from the disbute section of the game.

This would make EL a much more pleasant to play, not that it is unplesant now, it would just enhance the pleasure. The community could advenge some of the outlawish behavior that often ruins the fun of the game for individuals.

Edited August 19, 2008 by Inglor

[Learner]

I would like to see a vote taken once a month on 1 person that can be made PKingable for a week. The choses would come from the disbute section of the game.

This would make EL a much more pleasant to play, not that it is unplesant now, it would just enhance the pleasure. The community could advenge some of the outlawish behavior that often ruins the fun of the game for individuals.

This would probably make things worse since there are people that would cause more problems just to try to get made PKable.

[Light Lan]

I would like to see a vote taken once a month on 1 person that can be made PKingable for a week. The choses would come from the disbute section of the game.

This would make EL a much more pleasant to play, not that it is unplesant now, it would just enhance the pleasure. The community could advenge some of the outlawish behavior that often ruins the fun of the game for individuals.

This would probably make things worse since there are people that would cause more problems just to try to get made PKable.

if you really want to get made pkable, iirc you can just ask a mod nicely.

as some do for "find and kill me" contests.

 

I am more concerned about people making alts and manipulating such a vote. imho making people pkable or not should stay a decision of the mods.

[darkguy]

Very silly idea.

 

 

1st of all, voting for such a thing may cause the community to just keep voting for the people they hate or grouped up people may even go voting for people who are innocent or such. On that part, I'd prefer a random choosing instead. Just a random choice from *all* active players.

 

 

2nd of all, the person made PKable for a week will just not log in for a week. *shrugs*

[robotbob]

Wonderful, tyranny of the majority, "I nominate you for one week on the pillory, all those in favor of not being voted in next week, say AYE! "

 

AYE! : AYE!

 

Or

 

"I'd best advise you to do what I say, I have far more voting friends who shall cast

their ballot as I see fit, care to play another game for a week?"

 

Basically, our benevolent society of el, doesn't need witch trials or lynch mobs.

[Aislinn]

f you really want to get made pkable, iirc you can just ask a mod nicely.

Actually no, mods do not make players pk-able upon request, nor are the vast majority able to.

[Light Lan]

f you really want to get made pkable, iirc you can just ask a mod nicely.

Actually no, mods do not make players pk-able upon request, nor are the vast majority able to.

oh, then following part of that thread should be adjusted?

http://www.eternal-lands.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=7300

 

 

PKING RULES:

1. If someone specifically ASKS to be made Player-Killable, then you may make him PKable, but they must give you a reason and it must be a valid reason. If you see them abusing something because they are pkable, then unpk them immediately.

2. If you want to make someone PKable for a contest, that is fine too but ONLY if he/she agrees to it!

3. If someone has broken a rule on purpose and has flammed/spammed you and others in public, then you may make this person PKable. However you MUST also post on the abuse forum the reason you made this person pkable along with the chat log of their offenses.

 

I refer to point 1 and 2 here specifically.

[Aislinn]

oh, then following part of that thread should be adjusted?

No, it is done occasionally under extremely rare circumstances (requiring many conditions and qualifications) for all three of those situations, however not by the general mod population.

[Sir_Exeus]

Wonderful, tyranny of the majority, "I nominate you for one week on the pillory, all those in favor of not being voted in next week, say AYE! "

 

AYE! : AYE!

 

Or

 

"I'd best advise you to do what I say, I have far more voting friends who shall cast

their ballot as I see fit, care to play another game for a week?"

 

Basically, our benevolent society of el, doesn't need witch trials or lynch mobs.

 

omg I can't hardly unerstand a word you are saying

 

On topic: Bad idea. Learner said most of it.

[tork_unib]

I can see where Inglor is going with this. As it stands, when someone get's bagjumped or whatever the best that really happens is that the community can post all sorts of "i pk j00" threats in the disputes forum, but let's face it they ring rather hollow when all you have to do is simply stay out of the pk maps.

 

I doubt rayla or anyone else like her is too worried about not being able to get to the merc spawn / hydro.

 

Besides being banned from tradebots, and a rather frosty reception from the community, whet else is there?

 

No, what would be more appropriate would be some sort of system whereby you could exchange 50 hydro bars (or whatever, something high enough to ensure that it isn't done on a whim) in order to make a particular person pkable for say 24 hours, a bit like putting a bounty on people's heads.

 

I get the feeling that this could be a good guild project, no?

[Aislinn]

So the game is expected to have coded into it a punishment for something that is not against the rules of same game.

 

Absolutely an awful idea.

[tork_unib]

So the game is expected to have coded into it a punishment for something that is not against the rules of same game.

 

Absolutely an awful idea.

 

Well fair enough they aren't breaking the game rules, but rather the community rules that most of us choose to adhere to.

 

My real point is that faced with outlawish acts, we as the community have little option but to suck it up and get on with things. I'm not suggesting that my suggestion / brainfart would be applied in every case, who's going to blow nearly 500k because someone grabbed 1k worth of sulpher for example, but it would be nice to have some sort of a nuclear option.

[Aislinn]

Well fair enough they aren't breaking the game rules, but rather the community rules that most of us choose to adhere to.

Ok I'll work with you on this:

How do you propose to ensure that only the people in disputes who break these "community rules" are targeted? What is to prevent some wealthy person/guild/group of friends from doing this to some poor person he/they just happen to dislike for whatever reason who did not break these "rules"? Or somebody with high levels they are trying to catch up to? Or just picking somebody for the hell of it because they are wealthy and bored?

[The_Piper]

So the game is expected to have coded into it a punishment for something that is not against the rules of same game.

 

Absolutely an awful idea.

 

Well fair enough they aren't breaking the game rules, but rather the community rules that most of us choose to adhere to.

 

My real point is that faced with outlawish acts, we as the community have little option but to suck it up and get on with things. I'm not suggesting that my suggestion / brainfart would be applied in every case, who's going to blow nearly 500k because someone grabbed 1k worth of sulpher for example, but it would be nice to have some sort of a nuclear option.

 

Who cares about game/community rules in this case?

 

The only problem is, such an idea can be used to make innocent ppl's life a hell.

 

Problem is, what most ppl called an outlaw thing is bag jumping.

 

Should you put stuff in a bag?

 

No, you shouldnt. If you put stuff in a bag, expect to lose it. Full stop. Over. End of discussion.

 

If you still do it, live with it and the consequences, get bag jumped.

 

So, to say it extremly, you want to use a feature, which isnt implemented and meant the way how

you use it (put stuff in a bag and hope that you keep it).

 

Then, when others take that bags, you want to PK them.

 

Sorry, that doesnt fit together.

 

You break the common sense rules (dont put stuff in a bag and whine when others take it), but you

want to punish others when they use a feature of the game (take that bag).

 

And besides that, you want a feature, which might help you a little bit to punish bagjumpers, but has the

big downside, that it can be abused to PK innocent players.

 

Seriously, my very personal 2 cents.

 

NO!

 

Piper

[korrode]

robotbob said it all.

[tork_unib]

Well fair enough they aren't breaking the game rules, but rather the community rules that most of us choose to adhere to.

Ok I'll work with you on this:

How do you propose to ensure that only the people in disputes who break these "community rules" are targeted? What is to prevent some wealthy person/guild/group of friends from doing this to some poor person he/they just happen to dislike for whatever reason who did not break these "rules"? Or somebody with high levels they are trying to catch up to? Or just picking somebody for the hell of it because they are wealthy and bored?

 

Well nothing can prevent the situation you envision, except how costly it is for the individual or group to do. (I'm under no illusions that I may well be the first to be on the recieving end if something like this was ever implemented.) But in saying this, i do think the community would see an unprovoked action like that as equally if not more outlawish, and would react accordingly.

 

The idea of a tangible ingame consequence outside of shunning or the disputes forum is really what i'd be advocating here.

 

In terms of minimising the risks of abuse:

 

1: A limit as to how many bounties can be executed in a given time period, probably one a week or something.

 

2: Server message every 15 mins on CH4 saying who has had a bounty placed on their head by whom (and the option to specify a reason.)

 

3: Make it some other punishment. I'm sure i'm not the only person who's had ideas along these lines.

Instead of making someone pkable, maybe we could have one of lenny's kids seek the target out?

I once heard of an order of monks that were used by debt collectors. Instead of persuing bad debt with strong-arm tactics, the monks followed the person around, saying prayers, and calling on them to address their misbehaviour.

 

4: The option (advertised in the proposed server message) for the community to vote to repeal the sentence. If 51% of the online community typed #repeal tork_unib I'd have my red tag removed for example.

[Aislinn]

Well nothing can prevent the situation you envision, except how costly it is for the individual or group to do. (I'm under no illusions that I may well be the first to be on the recieving end if something like this was ever implemented.) But in saying this, i do think the community would see an unprovoked action like that as equally if not more outlawish, and would react accordingly.

"And would react accordingly"...what exactly would that be? And why isn't that method good enough NOW for the people in outlaws if it is good enough for people who abuse this suggestion?

[tork_unib]

Well nothing can prevent the situation you envision, except how costly it is for the individual or group to do. (I'm under no illusions that I may well be the first to be on the recieving end if something like this was ever implemented.) But in saying this, i do think the community would see an unprovoked action like that as equally if not more outlawish, and would react accordingly.

"And would react accordingly"...what exactly would that be? And why isn't that method good enough NOW for the people in outlaws if it is good enough for people who abuse this suggestion?

 

By "react accordingly" i would assume that if i were to have a bounty placed on the head of someone, and the community at large sees that as being an unjust act, then i would soon find a bounty on my own head.

 

As it stands now, our options as a community seem to be simply to ignore the person in question, and hope they go away. You can threaten all you want about the dire consequences should so-and-so bagjumper ever step into a pk map, but who has rayla on their kills counter?

 

If someone BroD's you in PK, you in theory have the capability to BroD them back. I don't know of many cases where the same can be said of people who bagjump.

 

The various points raised about the capability for abuse are well taken at this end however, and I do agree that it is probably best to look at it from the point of protecting the community. I've argued the topic as far as I can at this point.

[korrode]

If someone BroD's you in PK, you in theory have the capability to BroD them back. I don't know of many cases where the same can be said of people who bagjump.

No. Someone can BRoD you in PK and then choose to never go in PK again.

 

Just as someone can bagjump you and then choose to never 'bag-mix' themselves.

 

There is no double standard.

[Troger]

If someone BroD's you in PK, you in theory have the capability to BroD them back. I don't know of many cases where the same can be said of people who bagjump.

No. Someone can BRoD you in PK and then choose to never go in PK again.

 

Just as someone can bagjump you and then choose to never 'bag-mix' themselves.

 

There is no double standard.

Well told Korrode!