update: if he gets voted innocent, i will still consider this incident as somethign to matter a second time, after the blackrider thing, in case he gets in such trouble a next time. So he will have two sentence extending reasons next time, ..i am not trying to get any "revenge", but can't ignore repetead issues just becase i forgot about them and nobody reminded me of it.

PS @samon its not about the crits not being suitable compensation for the work, i would have given him MANY MANY times more valuable stuff including the crits, its about trust and trying to "play smart" and be sneaky, instead of being honest and responsible when using admin level tools. You can't behave like a player that follows his petty interests when you are trusted with such things.

21 hours ago, Miq said:

As a personal side-note. Aethon sold me a Horseman  26/04/16 20:05. I knew he had a horseman from the auction but the sudden sale was, sudden. 

Aethon, when I said I'd collaborate with you on plushies, you told me the money you got from selling them to would go towards the horseman auction, and that creature would be considered part of the MDA treasury, for quest sponsorship...

Maybe you plan to use the money earned for a similar purpose. If so that's fine. 

I just think you may need to consider your actions and communications more carefully going forward.

1 hour ago, Muratus del Mur said:

PS @samon its not about the crits not being suitable compensation for the work, i would have given him MANY MANY times more valuable stuff including the crits, its about trust and trying to "play smart" and be sneaky, instead of being honest and responsible when using admin level tools. You can't behave like a player that follows his petty interests when you are trusted with such things.

What I'm saying is that as long as Aethon says it was a misunderstanding, you can't really punish him. If you deem his inability to read between the lines to make it impossible for you to work together. You can however dismiss him from the task and confiscate what he obtained using the tools, as that part was perfectly clear.

Ivorak's post would be a third abuse, which depending on the exact situation might change things quite drastically, but I will refrain from commenting on that any further on that until Aethon has had the chance to explain the situation.

 

Also I would like to suggest moving this to heated discussions

ivorak, very interesting what comes out when you put a spotlight on someone.....(i hope he has an explenation?)

i want to make a more general clarification for other people that might work with me in the future.. there are people that have the common sense to do things in a way where no explenations are needed and no rules presented or "contracts signed" ...and those that need clarifications in extreme detail on what is ok and what is not ok to do, or find loopholes in the given rules and use those.

It is one thing to behave like that as a player (fine by me), and an absolutely totally different thing to behave like that with me or chew or in any official developing group or presence (not fine). It would be too offtopic to continue to explain here why, but if its something you don;t understand how come, then you probably fall in the category of people that have the potential to step wrong in such a cooperation, so better avoid.

I wish to work just with people that have common sense and respect and that don;t need a detailed set of rules to know what is ok and what is not ok to do when given tools for admin purposes.

5 hours ago, samon said:

What I'm saying is that as long as Aethon says it was a misunderstanding, you can't really punish him. If you deem his inability to read between the lines to make it impossible for you to work together.

That was precisely the reason why i stopped from punishing him myself and turned this into a public trial.

2 hours ago, Muratus del Mur said:

That was precisely the reason why i stopped from punishing him myself and turned this into a public trial.

But you are still searching for reasons to punish him and not reasons to not punish him? Interesting.

2 hours ago, Nimrodel said:

But you are still searching for reasons to punish him and not reasons to not punish him? Interesting.

I dont speak for Mur but this his his trial against him... so not surprising I guess?

@Ivorak - It was in the Treasury list (ask Esmerelda for confirmation) but I then removed it as I had replaced it with a different creature and a huge amount from my own personal stock. (Again, speak to Esmerelda if you're interested in a whole inventory) 

As you only gave me...4(?) plushies I believe, and a total of 28 plushies were sold for 8gc. This would mean your share would equate to 1:7. 8gc = 120sc. 1 = 15sc, 7 =105sc

I bought the horseman for 18gc 5sc, your "share" was 1gc, meaning the remaining 17gc 5sc belonged to me.

I did have it in store for the treasury, so I didn't fool you. But it turned out I required it and therefore took it back. I can happily pay you(or the treasury) back 1gc if you wish? Though I would take a moment to check what I've actually given so far...

----- 

This seems to have become a witch hunt, just trying to find a reason to "punish" me in some shape or form, which is fine, because at the end of the day...

Spoiler

And yes, I'm not taking this so seriously because of exactly that reason.

P.s. This could have been done a lot more privately and sorted far quicker if you'd reigned in the temper and listened to the three judges you already spoke to. But hey ho!

As DD pointed out, this is my trial against him, so ofc i am not trying to find reasons why not to punish him. I AM NOT ACTING AS A JUDGE HERE.

 

 

 

 

 

@Aethon glad you see things that way, at the end of the day md is gere to teach you a lesson whatever that lesson will be for you. Hopefully that lesson is not that you can turn your back and pretend you are in an oyher reality rach time things dont fit in your advantage. While me as a person have nothing against you as a person in rl, and never will, in THIS layer of reality, mur (now) does. So yeah, i am treating this fully involved, so to say. So should you as "Aethon".

And no its not a witch hunt because it is not based on conflict of beliefs but on things you did. Unless you claim that the conduit i demand is not within your moral standards, then it would be.

I cannot find the exact quote but I will try to remember correctly. Its taken from one of Jiddu Krishnamurti conversations.

"If there is conflict there cannot be truth at the same time ..."

In the light of this ... my opinion is that both of you are somehow not aware enough what you could have done better. Please consider to talk again with each other with the help of a third "person" who would be the mediator. There is no wrong or correct here, just something which happened in the past which needs to be looked at with proper awareness cutting out all the emotions. I can see that this topic is somehow intended to work like this "mediator". My feeling is that both of you are thinking "I`m correct!" but the moment you think you know the truth or you´re correct, you´re not.

I vote for " Confiscate the goods aquired and do nothing more " even if it´s not what I would do, but all other options are fitting even less.

I hope you can settle this fast and clean, the more time and energy it takes the less work will be finished by you Mur and this is the bigger picture we all should focus on. All of you who are working on A25 are doing a great job and MD needs more of it without the disturbance of such "incidents".

 

Edited May 1, 201610 yr by Menhir

This trial has ended,

you have decided for an intermediary solution
According to the votes, the solution decided by you is: " Confiscate the goods aquired and do nothing more " so this shall be.

Creatures where already confiscated so they will remain so.
The rest of what i said in this topic stands.