|
|
|
|
|
|
| Why is it alright for some to have two identities but not be identified as the same person but it is not alright for others other than to satisfy the whim and fancy of the illogical and unethical IBHers. |
|
I wasn't sure about icho tolot/Lord Atlan since the split of personnalities was made sometimes ago. But in your case, your new identity has apperead with the contract, so I have roleplayed trying to escape the contract under a new identity.
Now, if the rule is than any login associated with one person is a target, even it exist before the contract, so the next time Ichot Tolot is targetted, Lord Altan will be also a target.
          
| |
|
| As it is only that A GAME. |
|
Yes. But we just need to find a way to motivate the target to play a cat & mice game
| |
|
|
|
|
|
#157
by Citizen PassingBye - 10/21/2004 5:15:48 PM
| your new identity has apperead with the contract, |
|
Since when did the "contract" determine when one could add a new identity? I have not seen that rule, either in your game rules or in the Metaverse rules.
 
| |
|
#158
by Citizen PassingBye - 10/21/2004 5:17:10 PM
| I agree that another ID is another person, but it should have a certain age to count as a propper protector in this nice game. |
|
Seem like a rule made up after the fact to justify what was done.
| |
|
#159
by Citizen PassingBye - 10/21/2004 5:19:03 PM
If youo want to make it a rule, do like you did on the other new rules - they did not apply to the person under contract. Seems fair. Why brand me a sore looser when you change the rules in the middle of the game. I think anyone has the right to question such an action.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly, I don't see why you are so mad Weyr. Its just a game. And you know that you were doing it just to avoid the kill. And its just a game. If you are so mad, why not call for a contract in retribution?
Oh, BTW, I take quite an offense to being called illogical and unethical. I take quite a lot of pride in being logical and ethical in everything I do.
[Message Edited]
  
| |
|
Ok, idea about new policy to keep this from going up again. If it can be conclusively proven, by proof that an alias is the same person using at least two methods of identification, then that alias is consider a valid target. OR Contracts can be issued for one person. Each additional alias is double cost in points.
| |
|
#166
by Citizen PassingBye - 10/21/2004 6:45:26 PM
| Oh, BTW, I take quite an offense to being called illogical and unethical. |
|
For this I appologize. I did not mean any of this personnaly towards any of your real life values.
A lot has been said and it may be worth thinking about how we got where are are.
It was implied that I was a cheat by chaning my persona. If this game is all for fun, why was it not fun to the IBHers.
Playing is fun when you know the rules. My mother in law used want to win so baddly when she played with her grandchildren that she would cheat just to win. The kids didn't know that the rules included cheating. It was not fun to them.
My computers had both been down the first part of your hunt for me. You can ask others in the GG about this - I posted at the Emabssy in our forums there. I spend most of my time trying to figure out why I could not play GC - the real game. Turns out there were a few technical issues due to aging graphics cards and what could be accelerated, etc., but the bightest amount of time was trying to find out why the Evil Pack mods won't work prorperly on my machines. I cannot use them. Not that they are the culprit, but they are the straw that broke the camels back. I don't have the time to go thruo all the purterbations of mods to find out which ones are interfereing, so I just removed the last one that caused the problems.
I noticed that in the hunt for Icho, it was noticed that he had multiple identies and no one equated them. So, I figure that it would be ok to generate a new idenity. Why not. There was no stated or implied rule that you could not. In fact, the impled rule was that is was ok. Some good comments have been made about how to handle this.
There are other things that were said, some in frustration others for what ever reason. I enjoy the game, I stayed away from the forums for a long time because I could not see the value. Then came a nexus of people that gelled with me. The forums became fun. Am I a sore looers, yes, ask damoose about my soor buttocks. That is a game as well, and has been a fun game for some of us. Did I object when I was made lunch - yes, in the same way I did here. Eventually it became part of the game. That game also had few rules, but it was easy going and we all mad allowances and wove them in.
This game is differnet. Even as the rules are being hammered out, the game will be different. Why, because only the IBHers benefit at this point in time from playing. Make so all can benefit, or take away the perceived benefit of the IBHers so that all are equal, not just pawns in a game someone else is playing. No one wants to be a pawn.
Again, I appologize if I hurt anyone elses feelings. I have not meant to do that.
[Message Edited]
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Oh, BTW, I take quite an offense to being called illogical and unethical |
|
Same for me since I was the one who have decided to target KillAllRoy. But I stated why, and was waiting for confirmation of the kill. So I have no problem with the erasing of the kill.
| I noticed that in the hunt for Icho, it was noticed that he had multiple identies and no one equated them. |
|
Not exactly correct. See the post #54 in this thread
#54 by Veteran Peace Phoenix - 10/17/2004 9:03:28 AM
You did noth think it would be that easy, did you Peace?
|
|
Well, with the "don't shoot when passants are here" rule, it isn't easy. If it wasn't for this rule, you would have problem to be protected by your empire.
And since I know that Lord Altan and Icho Tolot are the same person, is elimating Lord Altan a valid kill for Icho Tolot contract?
|
|
I have asked if it was a valid kill, but I haven't got any respone. And contrary to you, the alias Lord Altan is used since 8/2/2004, long before the contract.
And we all know that in RL a way to avoid contract is to use a newer identity. But it won't always prevent the contract to be fillfulled. Since there was lots of RL similitaries (notably the passants protecting the target), I have thought it was in spirit of the game to consider KillAllRoys as Weyrleader using a new identity to escape contract.
| only the IBHers benefit at this point in time from playing |
|
I agree, we need to find a way for it is fun to others.
More I would say that only me PP benefit since I am the only IBH who actively hunt.
| |
|
I will recapitulate the current rules. In order to be less violent, I will used "neutralized" instead of "terminated". It will look like more that what happen to Han Solo with the bounty placed by Jabba the Hutt:
How contracts work: -
Once a contract has been issued IBH members will 'comb' the galciv threads in search of the 'targets' posts. The search begin after a 24hours cooling off period that allow the IBH members to refuse the contract or the target to explain why the contract should be refused.
When this period end, the hunt will begin. If one of our assasson notices a reply from the target as the last post of the thread, issued after the beginning of the hunt, we will post a Target Neutralized message. The assassin that neutralized the target will receive special commendation on the website.
Only one 'contract' to be issued at any one time with a maximum duration of 48 hours. No contract can be issued in the cooling off period (which end when the hunt begin of if the contract is refused).
Any metaverse member may issue a contract if there is not one already active. Please keep the reward points sensible.
Please post your contracts in this thread following this format: Contract issued on "insert name here" - XXX Points.
Please remember that the idea of this is to have some fun here in the galciv forums & is not intended as an insult or personal threat to any board member.
The IBH Empire does not condone violence in any shape, matter or form.
Should you have any questions about this please ask.
| |
|
Here are my proposals about some points that have been risen:
- different alias.
If the target have been actively using different alias before the issuing of the contract, a confirmation of targetting the multiple alias must be made.
If the target starts to use new alias after the issuing of the contract, it will consider as trying to hide and will be a valid target.
- other people must find fun in the game (especially the target).
To keep the target posting, I propose the following:
divide the day in periods of 3 hours: from 12PM to 3AM, from 3AM to 6 AM, .... for a total of 8 periods per day.
If a post is made during a period that isn't followed by a neutralization message (only the first post in the period count), the prize will go down by 5 points.
if prize goes down to 0, the hunt stops, the target is considered has having succesfully eluding the hunter, is credited of the initial bounty prize, and is allowed to act as a bounty hunter in next hunts that doesn't target a member of his empire.
If a target is neutralized in 5 different contracts, he is also allowed to act as a bounty hunter in next hunts that doesn't target a member of his empire.
In order to allow the bounty prize to correctly decrease, the target can post in this thread to give the reference to one of his post not followed by a neutralization message per 3 hour period. This recapitulation post can't be targeted for neutralization and won't count for decreasing price. think of it like a news report explaining that the target what seen but not neutralized.
Any comments?
[Message Edited]
| |
|
| If youo want to make it a rule, do like you did on the other new rules - they did not apply to the person under contract. Seems fair. |
|
Well, when I have first trying to terminate Icho Tolot, Exalted Druid (see post #22 in this thread)has came to say that the kill wasn't a valid one since the post that have allowed the termination was made before the issuing of the contract. But at this time, there wasn't any rule for this case. So we have changed the rules during a contract and applied them to the person under contract.
[Message Edited]
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
