Poll: If a player takes reasonable and justified action to prevent calamity on the server, should they be punished?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes
44.12%
15 44.12%
No
55.88%
19 55.88%
Total 34 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Rule 1.9 [backseat administration]
#3
I totally get your point. But eitherway the rulebreaker will just respawn or disconnect and keep going. Not to mention that it can be abused, excusing yourself over your own rulebreak because "he started it first" or something.
It can also end up leaving a player unpunished, because you chose to stop him instead of reporting him. Of course, you could report him aswell, but not many players will keep that in mind if the problem gets solved.

Perhaps you, Disabled, and other members, know what's right or wrong according to the rules.
Perhaps you can handle the situation without any further provocations.
But keep in mind that there are others out there who would possibly just make the whole situation worse.

Just saying that things would not look pretty, and the rule is good where it is.
[Image: yk9I3Jg.png]
The following 7 users Like Infernaw's post:
  • Falc, aDisabledDeer, Decay, Hitman, Holdem, FEaRIeZz, Grunt


Messages In This Thread
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Balls - 12-09-2015, 12:20 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Infernaw - 12-09-2015, 12:36 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Falc - 12-09-2015, 12:50 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Spear - 12-09-2015, 01:13 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Spear - 12-09-2015, 01:19 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Emil - 12-09-2015, 02:44 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Tomo - 12-09-2015, 04:18 PM
RE: Rule 1.9 [backseat administration] - by Reebs - 12-16-2015, 12:25 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)