Brett

Rule Discussion Subject: Use of Government Perks Rule I want to...: Remove Elaboration: In the Faction Rules, under Use of Government perks, you have this line: Any faction that is financially supported through the Faction Team or Scripting may not have a wage higher than $1,500 except for brief periods of time where bonuses may be given out for the holidays. I believe this rule is arbitrary, and serves as a method to limit IC roleplay by OOC server rule limitation. Now in a sense, I understand where the rule is coming from. It's co

We've actually run into a lot of issues where people get released by admins, were not supposed to be released, and although they can simply be put back, usually they would go and commit more IC crimes which would affect other players which they never should have had the freedom to do so anyway. And it's hard to argue "Well you would never have been able to commit that crime in the first place," when they're response is "Well I would've been released, as an admin did it." It happens more often then you would think.

On what basis can I report them? Please tell me, because every time a UAT member is reported, nothing happens.

Report them on what basis though? "They're drunk, punish them?" I have no basis to report them, because they broke no rules. Simply that they admitted they were intoxicated and that influenced their bad admin decisions the day before.

I don't think it's dumb, considering how two UAT admins in my time of Owl gaming have made decisions that are stupid because they were intoxicated, to which they fully admitted it. This has trickled down to some admins, and players. It's not dumb, it's an issue.

But you're not really trolling, because you're drunk. Not in full control of your actions.

And again. This is just not for people who break rules. Just a majority of this would most likely be directed towards them. It's generally people who also are intoxicated, but act like "mongs," because they're intoxicated.

I've had drunken admins do some stupid stuff, that weren't against the rules but generally shouldn't have been done to the point I actually got off the server just to avoid the "intoxicated," admin. I offered the moderation that most of the rule breakers would mostly be subject to the rule, but it can be extended to other situations for that full deterrence. Not every situation with an intoxicated person means they've broken another rule. Some of it is just behavior that shouldn't happen, but isn't against the rules.

It would be a separate punishment, from whatever they did. In order to act as a deterrence.

Yes, but it's more of a discouragement. We don't need people who are high or intoxicated really on the server, as they're bound to mess up. I just think this rule needs to be implemented as a sorta "Take a break man, come back later." Because even in situations that don't include an admin report directly, I've had people who are oocly intoxicated engage in some rather strange actions they otherwise wouldn't have done. Just saying.

Rule Discussion Subject: Limiting OOC Intoxication on the Server I want to...: New Rule Elaboration: Basically, due to some instances in this community of people using the excuse of "I was Intoxicated whether by Alcohol, Pain Killers, or any other Drugs," I believe a new OOC rule needs to be brought in to address this. Basically, people are using the excuse of intoxication to get out of punishments which they would otherwise have gotten if they were not intoxicated and I believe we need to control this a bit more. So here is my