Nashira wrote:
Baldric wrote:
I'm sure nobody would have come up with that stuff if it had been clear from the get-go that this was Dulrik's decision.
That is the beauty of assumptions and the classic saying that goes with them. Regardless, I actually found it funny that this HAD to be all about my need to show authority. I could have pointed the finger at Dulrik immediately, but what difference does the blame game make? It does not change the situation and it shouldn't change the reaction either. We are a staff and we work together. I was one of the people who caught Ardith, I was one of the people who investigated it, I was the one who addressed him in hell, I was also "to blame". I didn't bother responding to every comment to correct false assumptions because there really was no point and many people answered the obvious while twisting words around. Tragonis made a point that Dulrik makes the calls on deletion and that Ardith should appeal to him. It was worded in such a way as to suggest that I MUST be going above my authority when low and behold... Tragonis was right, D made the call.
Likewise, I MUST have broken my word. I will admit that I did use the word "curse" instead of "punishment" because at the time, it MAY have been a curse. In the log I admit that I don't even know what the protocol was, but that I was going to confer and get back to him. The game had not been reset, the money had not remained in the account yet. I thought that he may very well be right, the money may not save at all. That all changed when it did and it was. Regardless, one would really be grasping at straws to make an argument over word usage.
Most of you saw a one sided log which showed my interaction with him from his point of view. I didn't post my log of all of the steps that took place behind the curtains and therefor no one except the staff that was involved knew what else transpired. I know this may very well sound like a a stretch, but the immstaff generally hates having to punish anyone at all. In a perfect world we would be able to build our little areas, fix all the notices that get sent to us and interact with players in a positive way without ever once having to "lay the gavel down".
But seriously, don't steal my girlfriend.
Just to clarify this, you may not want to punish anyone, but that's solely because you'd prefer not be bothered with it as a whole. I'd equate it more to a local district judge with an extremely light case load. He'd rather be playing solitaire or working on the next great American novel, but if a case comes across his desk he's generally going to dispense with it a quickly as possible and with little regret to the outcome.
I've been on both sides of it, Dulrik is about as close to a punishment machine as nice guys go. He's very quick to punish first, and then if someone wants to show overwhelming evidence to the contrary they can try to plead for the mercy of the court. Even in situations where the punishment was demonstratively wrong, it's often like moving a mountain to get it reversed. Also, not to nitpick, but you had to know what the outcome was going to be when you when to D about it. He's not exactly an enigma on this kind of thing. I'm not saying you were simply flexing your authority, but anytime the phrase begins with "I'm not exactly sure of the punishment protocol I'll have to ask Dulrik" the sentence should end with "but you're probably going to be deleted."