- April 9th, 2017, 9:41 am
#73507
I was in a discussion with KipPeblo and PapaAuzzy in sc, and I've beginning to realize how painful it is to not have any clear guidelines and/or plugins that can easily supply staff with proof in sits.
They (or at least Auzzy) means that it's up to the players to come up with evidence that shows that they are innocent. This sit immediatly comes to mind.
Let's assume player A gets attempt kos'd by player B. Naturally, player A retaliates and kills player B. The logs will of course show that player A killed player B, making player A look like the bad guy and player B like the victim, when in reality it was the other way around.
After the discussion with PapaAuzzy, I figure that he would've banned player A, since player A almost never has any proof in that kind of sit. Player B would've walked free in the streets with not a worry in the world, with even his inventory restored.
This sit comes up almost all the time, and I personally thinks it's completely horrible that we have no real way of knowing who is at fault. Because in these kind of sits, it's almost always 50/50 who was right/wrong. What do I do? Do I just trust my gut? Because trusting one's gut is a very unprofessional way of dealing with sits, even if it might work more than it fails. Apparently, auzzy would do this (and I'm sure many other mods would) but is this really the right way of doing it? I have become very anxious when dealing with sits like these because it feels like russian roulette, just hoping for the player I'm banning to actually be the criminal. This has resulted in me just refunding both sides and carry on with RP. But even this feels awkward in times when I'm pretty sure who the koser is, but there is no absolute proof.
They (or at least Auzzy) means that it's up to the players to come up with evidence that shows that they are innocent. This sit immediatly comes to mind.
Let's assume player A gets attempt kos'd by player B. Naturally, player A retaliates and kills player B. The logs will of course show that player A killed player B, making player A look like the bad guy and player B like the victim, when in reality it was the other way around.
After the discussion with PapaAuzzy, I figure that he would've banned player A, since player A almost never has any proof in that kind of sit. Player B would've walked free in the streets with not a worry in the world, with even his inventory restored.
This sit comes up almost all the time, and I personally thinks it's completely horrible that we have no real way of knowing who is at fault. Because in these kind of sits, it's almost always 50/50 who was right/wrong. What do I do? Do I just trust my gut? Because trusting one's gut is a very unprofessional way of dealing with sits, even if it might work more than it fails. Apparently, auzzy would do this (and I'm sure many other mods would) but is this really the right way of doing it? I have become very anxious when dealing with sits like these because it feels like russian roulette, just hoping for the player I'm banning to actually be the criminal. This has resulted in me just refunding both sides and carry on with RP. But even this feels awkward in times when I'm pretty sure who the koser is, but there is no absolute proof.