Graalians - View Single Post

MattKan · 05-20-2012

It's good that they're finally taking a stand against these kinds of issues. The problem is that they're going to far.

It's like how the US Government used to not protect people AT ALL but now they're protecting them TOO MUCH and causing more problems. Julius should know there's a fine line between being a virtual child molester and just roleplaying, because here's the thing. Nobody is a flat out virtual child molester. You can't just call a fifty year old a virtual child molester for playing Graal. Staff can, however, check a player's pms to see if he is molesting people virtually. And if he is then he's a virtual [child] molester, which means he should be banned. You can't tell a person's age, Higbey, but you can easily tell if their guilty or not. And now Julius seems to be mass banning role players instead of investigating each case which is definitely the wrong way to go. I mean, I doubt he'll read this but that's my two cents nonetheless. Also, banning everybody who mentions AIM or Skype is another example of blanket banning instead of simply investigating on a case by case basis. I don't see any reason with people saying "oh, btw, contact me @ AIM or skype" in a PM or even they're status. Asking in the city for people to Skype them, however, is a bit odd and you might ask them to stop, but a month ban is totally ridiculous and uncalled for.

Basically blanket banning is illadvised and all GPs should decide things on a case by case basis. Another thing is that you can't just sentence people to month long bans for stuff like this, because that's extreme. You can't start blanket adding month bans either. Those should be dealt with on a case by case basis--i. e. players who ask for people to skype video chat with them should be banned for 3 days, and players who molest others via text and in-game beds and such should be banned for 7 days, or whatever. But thirty days for everything is unacceptable and almost a bit lazy. Remember that your goal is to keep players on the server and not threaten them with bans and scare them out of doing anything or having fun playing the game. It will bite you in the butt later on.

Now, here's my opinion on rating guild pictures. I don't think it's wise for players to be putting pictures of themselves out on the internet. It can be dangerous and I don't really understand why staff focus on banning role-playing and people advertising skype and IM accounts than this, which is a large threat in my opinion.

05-20-2012	68
MattKan the KattMan Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: United States Posts: 4,204	It's good that they're finally taking a stand against these kinds of issues. The problem is that they're going to far. It's like how the US Government used to not protect people AT ALL but now they're protecting them TOO MUCH and causing more problems. Julius should know there's a fine line between being a virtual child molester and just roleplaying, because here's the thing. Nobody is a flat out virtual child molester. You can't just call a fifty year old a virtual child molester for playing Graal. Staff can, however, check a player's pms to see if he is molesting people virtually. And if he is then he's a virtual [child] molester, which means he should be banned. You can't tell a person's age, Higbey, but you can easily tell if their guilty or not. And now Julius seems to be mass banning role players instead of investigating each case which is definitely the wrong way to go. I mean, I doubt he'll read this but that's my two cents nonetheless. Also, banning everybody who mentions AIM or Skype is another example of blanket banning instead of simply investigating on a case by case basis. I don't see any reason with people saying "oh, btw, contact me @ AIM or skype" in a PM or even they're status. Asking in the city for people to Skype them, however, is a bit odd and you might ask them to stop, but a month ban is totally ridiculous and uncalled for. Basically blanket banning is illadvised and all GPs should decide things on a case by case basis. Another thing is that you can't just sentence people to month long bans for stuff like this, because that's extreme. You can't start blanket adding month bans either. Those should be dealt with on a case by case basis--i. e. players who ask for people to skype video chat with them should be banned for 3 days, and players who molest others via text and in-game beds and such should be banned for 7 days, or whatever. But thirty days for everything is unacceptable and almost a bit lazy. Remember that your goal is to keep players on the server and not threaten them with bans and scare them out of doing anything or having fun playing the game. It will bite you in the butt later on. Now, here's my opinion on rating guild pictures. I don't think it's wise for players to be putting pictures of themselves out on the internet. It can be dangerous and I don't really understand why staff focus on banning role-playing and people advertising skype and IM accounts than this, which is a large threat in my opinion.