Rebel Abuse Via Quests

[Kafuuka]

*edited because Z pointed out i missed a sentence*

I think that both rebels and kings are edgy on these things.
The kings' worries are easily understood: they have some power and could loose it to people who have less power. In the extreme case, as Firs points out, someone with nothing to loose (or at least thinking they have nothing to loose) can do whatever they want.
The rebels on the other hand, are naturally attacked by any means possible and currently there is no historical basis to believe a rebellion could succeed. The means used against them are apparently beyond their expectations and their progress is slowing according to some. It's easy to question something to be unjust or unfair, however it does lead to further polarization on the forum and increases the suspicion that rebels, or at least some of them, hurried into the situation they are in now, without considering all the consequences. Which is one of the things which would worry kings: people rebelling without fully knowing the consequences and not being able to revert their situation. Such people will try to move forward if they can't go back, regardless of whether they really believe forward would be better. Do rebels have it too easy? Probably not. Is it too easy to become a rebel without fully understanding it? Probably yes, but then again we do like the game for allowing you to make huge mistakes.

Edited December 10, 2010 by Kafuuka

[Firsanthalas]

In fairness, I kinda did say that.
But I stand by what I've said. AND.... 'I'll also comment as a king.' My very first sentence in that post. So telling me my post is skewed to one viewpoint, when I've actually stated quite clearly that I am infact posting from that viewpoint....well it seems odd at the very least.

I also don't believe that my post was offtopic at all. Its about alleged abuse of a king on the subject of WPs and rebel status. I dealt with that.

Kings were supposed to have other means to reward and recognise citizens. Currently these abilities don't exist (not a whine, simple statement of fact). The only real method of reward kings have is the allotment of WPs, whether its a direct reward, or to help someone with running a quest.
On that note, I'd like to point out that I also give WP codes to people that are in lands with no king and therefore possibly no access to WP codes. I only really refuse people who have a king that they can (and should be) getting WP codes from. So, this also erodes the idea that a rebel is losing out on something to a loyal citizen, as even non-citizens can get WP codes from me. I also believe that at least one or two of the other kings supply WP codes to MD citizens with no king. As a king, Im not out to horde WP codes or prevent people in the realm from running quests. I don't think any king is at heart.

(EDIT: While some of my comments may seem to be about me and not Jester's case, its because they are coming from the point of view of a king. And therefore could be experienced by me or another king in the future. I am not taking a side in the dispute in Necrovion here. Please do not assume that I am in Jester's camp, or against Pamps or anything else.)

Edited December 10, 2010 by Firsanthalas

[Jubaris]

saying how your title doesn't mean anything, while on the other hand you hoard all authority over Loreroot, while the game officially recognizes you as its ruler (meaning that you can sanction all behavior that you don't like, and can encourage everything you like), falls into the water.
You shape a land's path. Rewards don't have to be based on game mechanics prizes such as WPs, tags or whatever you want to have as an "official pat on the head".

[Yrthilian]

Princ Rhaegar i believe you are going off topic yet again with your personal issues. Please stick to the topic at hand
and not have yet another Princ V Firs again.

Back on topic

From a Kings point

The issue of WP's and whom can have them. At this point from a years experience IT has been seen that a king CAN decided
whom can or who cannot have a WP they sponsor. In the case of Jester he wi within the right as the current owner of the
land WP's.

Regards the status of rebel in this case
It is their choice to become a rebel. In this incident it would appear the rebels didnt ask enough questions before becoming rebels
It might have been a better idea to have used the forum topic in regards to the rebel status and figure it all out.
To me the rebels have a good system (yes more development is needed) In this system IF worked right they could make things happen
but so far and sorry if i offend any rebels, but it would seem to me they have not really worked to make things happen.
If you want change you make the change happen.

From ME point of view

I still think there is no issue here. The point is role with the punches use what is happening in your favour
turn it all around. I have to say i am a bit disappointed in the moaning aspect here and was hoping that the rebels
would have been more inventive in their actions. To me if you cant use the system you are given then you are not suited to
even consider replacing the current king.

[Tarquinus]

Keith Moon is an excommunicate, and not a rebel, but I wanted to say something tangential to the subject of "rebel abuse" (of which I see no evidence). The rebels are not all whining, and seasonal considerations are slowing the progress of their campaign. I submit to the community that it is still too early to tell whether the partly implemented system treats kings, rebels, and loyal citizens fairly.

[Aysun]

I've been avoiding this thread because it got a bit silly with other people bringing up old personal issues to throw at old foes (or so it seems- I can only judge by what's been said here), but overall my position is and has been this:

A citizen, not the king, started a quest. A citizen was ordered to bias whose entries they accepted according to the king's bias. Since they are prize provider, I concede that this is fair enough. Since the issue has turned INTO that, I have never had a problem with THAT SPECIFIC logic- however this was not the original problem.

The ORIGINAL problem as depicted in Rasiel's thread (which is no longer an accurate record of events considering all the posts Jester deleted/edited and that Rasiel edited) was that Jester was ordering all citizens to ban all rebels from ALL CITIZEN-RUN QUESTS regardless of the source of prizes- meaning that even if an individual provided all of the prizes themselves, unless they wanted to face potential excommunication, they could not, by any means, hold an open quest because of the King's personal bias. THIS is what I originally had a problem with, and still do- THIS is what I think should be debated over.

However, as the argument progressed in Rasiel's thread, Jester changed his position a few times to finally result in saying that only in instances where he provides the prize that he orders rebels not to be counted- IF I am understanding him correctly; again, the record in that thread isn't the most accurate and was only partially transferred over to this thread out of extreme frustration with Jester constantly deleting what were originally very short posts asking the specifics of the rules that did not exist at the time of the thread creation, and for the ferocity of the original post of this thread I apologize to the rest of the community- it was not my original plan.

So, before any more possible misunderstandings are had, I thought I would clarify all of the events leading up to this. I *would* be interested in hearing the community's opinions on exactly how much power one thinks a King could, or should, have over their subjects when it comes to personal projects, and how much autonomy a citizen should have regarding such things. Should it be absolute dictatorship, utter obedience, or else lengthy jail sentences for trying to hold one's own? Or, is a citizen entitled to some amount of autonomy without the shadow of a trigger-happy monarch over them? I think some interesting thoughts could be had on these topics, and I do believe they are quite related to this original problem.

Thoughts?

Edited December 15, 2010 by Aysun

[Mya Celestia]

[color="#8B0000"][font="Palatino Linotype"]When one belongs to a land, they are subject to the ruler's laws. If that ruler is a dictator, you have options.

I do feel that things should be spelled out for the citizens. They shouldn't have to guess what they can and can't do. Granted a ruler can't be expected to catch everything, but a lack of laws is no excuse. If a king wishes to put stipulations on quests held by his people, it should be in his laws. People aren't mind readers. Yes, there are a few things that should be obvious to a citizen like trying to do something that the king would have to answer to Mur/council for.

However, a citizen shouldn't expect the king to chase them down to check on things. Kings aren't mind readers either. A citizen should approach the king with a land relating project like wish point awards or forming groups that take a name from the land.

As with any relationship, communication is foundational for success. If you aren't sure, ask.[/font][/color]

[Aysun]

[quote]However, a citizen shouldn't expect the king to chase them down to check on things. Kings aren't mind readers either. A citizen should approach the king with a land relating project like wish point awards or forming groups that take a name from the land.[/quote]

The irony, Mya, is that all these things were done before everything went downhill. It was Jester's severe lack of follow-through and inactivity in the land that caused such widespread frustration.


As for the new rules feature, I think it has potential- not just to make things clear and referenceable, but also as something that will probably become an open record of the land as rules are created as a result of certain events, thus giving it an historical context.

[Kafuuka]

[quote name='Aysun' timestamp='1292451616' post='75529']
I've been avoiding this thread because it got a bit silly with other people bringing up old personal issues to throw at old foes (or so it seems- I can only judge by what's been said here), but overall my position is and has been this:
[/quote]
You made the topic and then avoided it and are now coming back with this kind of introduction? You wish to claim you are better at 'not bringing up old personal issues?'

[quote]
A citizen, not the king, started a quest. A citizen was ordered to bias whose entries they accepted according to the king's bias. Since they are prize provider, I concede that this is fair enough. Since the issue has turned INTO that, I have never had a problem with THAT SPECIFIC logic- however this was not the original problem.
[/quote]
[quote]
the record in that thread isn't the most accurate and was only partially transferred over to this thread out of extreme frustration with Jester constantly deleting what were originally very short posts asking the specifics of the rules that did not exist at the time of the thread creation, and for the ferocity of the original post of this thread I apologize to the rest of the community- it was not my original plan.
[/quote]
It is your responsibility to quote correctly. Instead you made a mistake, which can be forgiven. Yet twice you blame others for your mistake. That cannot be forgiven. It's things like this which make the rebels look like <insert pejorative>.


On the subject that is supposedly the topic of this thread: yes he can.
1. He's king
2. Necrovion has never been reputed to be a nice place
3. Necrovion is actually a monarchy

[Aysun]

I did NOT quote incorrectly, Jester changed his stance multiple times to end in the final result. That he cannot state a solid opinion on things isn't something I can control. I have blamed no one for any 'mistake' considering I do not see what 'mistake' you're talking about- could you be clearer if you'd like it addressed?

With regards to your points, they miss the actual points completely. King is not a free license to abandon the responsibilities of a monarch once you get the crown or even later on down the road, being nice or bad has nothing to do with Necrovion to begin with so that point is in itself pointless, and yes it is a Monarchy- too bad it isn't run like one.

[Kafuuka]

[quote name='Aysun' timestamp='1292653008' post='75654']
I did NOT quote incorrectly, Jester changed his stance multiple times to end in the final result. That he cannot state a solid opinion on things isn't something I can control. I have blamed no one for any 'mistake' considering I do not see what 'mistake' you're talking about- could you be clearer if you'd like it addressed?
[/quote]
It is still you who decided to quote him when he was talking about WP codes. You can't come in here two weeks later and say 'oh but jester actually said something different and i wanted to talk about that.' Not only do you try that, you're also stating that it is our fault for not understanding what this topic is about and you say it is jesters' fault that you couldn't quote him right. If he did make a more bold statement and you read it, why did you have to quote a less bold one? You yourself said you have screencaps and everything.

[quote]
With regards to your points, they miss the actual points completely. King is not a free license to abandon the responsibilities of a monarch once you get the crown or even later on down the road, being nice or bad has nothing to do with Necrovion to begin with so that point is in itself pointless, and yes it is a Monarchy- too bad it isn't run like one.
[/quote]
Well, first we had the subject of this thread be 'kings not sponsoring codes to rebels', when the majority agreed that they can, you decided to change the topic into 'jester is banning rebels from all citizen quests regardless of sponsor'. Since that point is failing to gain support, you wish to change the topic into 'jester is a bad monarch'?
Is Jester running necrovion as a monarch? He didn't host elections, so actually yes he is.
Is punishing rebels the same as abondoning your responsibilities as a monarch? I'd say it is quite the opposite.
Is Necrovion being a nice or bad place relevant to what you expect of its monarch? Yes it is. A monarch can be benevolent or oppressive and egotistical. There is nothing in the word monarch that implies the king to be a nice person. If you look at the history of Necrovion, its kings have from the beginning paid more attention to their own goals than to what happens to their citizens.

[Dragual]

[quote name='Aysun' timestamp='1292451616' post='75529']


The ORIGINAL problem as depicted in Rasiel's thread (which is no longer an accurate record of events considering all the posts Jester deleted/edited and that Rasiel edited) was that Jester was ordering all citizens to ban all rebels from ALL CITIZEN-RUN QUESTS regardless of the source of prizes- meaning that even if an individual provided all of the prizes themselves, unless they wanted to face potential excommunication, they could not, by any means, hold an open quest because of the King's personal bias. THIS is what I originally had a problem with, and still do- THIS is what I think should be debated over.

[/quote]

Can I just say... Duh? That seems to be very logical. He is king, and helping anyone who stands against him is treason. So yea, jail time seems to fit the crime of treason. Being a rebel you are guilty of treason. That simple. Yes, there are times when you have to take a king out of power, but it is still going against the crown. I'm not saying I support the king and his doings, nor am I saying that I support the rebellion. This just doesn't make any sence as to why you would complain about something like that. You get what you get by the actions you preform.