Napoleonic Wars League [Season 1-4]

[Joseph Graham]

Punishing someone for a technicality that doesn't exist is daft.

[Hadhod]

Do you really think there should be a rule against insulting? It should be common sense (and I know it is) that you don't insult, and if an insult goes to far it can result in consequences. The point you are bringing up is just for the sake of bringing it up, you know it is nonsense.

You see, a better way of going about this is to make a list or criteria of words that someone should not use, because then you actually define what is 'insulting'. 'Insulting' is different from everyone's perspective, it's called subjectivity, and there's a reason why laws and rules are very specific, so subjectivity cannot exploit their interpretation.

People will always find a way around lists set in stone. Laws are actually not specific because laws can't cover every possible way of insulting etc. So making a list of terms should not be used is nonsense.

[Hekko]

I know of course that the law would not be applicable in this situation, no one said anything about sueing Nutty for that. I merely used it as an example that you can't use insults in daily life (as you stated it would be allowed).
I did not know that Nutty's insult was directed at the Spartans as a whole, however since he then meant all of them everyone is insulted, an even worse offense.

Well, walking up to a random stranger will not really cause alarm or distress in them. They might find me rude or get angry, but they would not really be afraid which is the point of the law.

So insulting someone per se is not illegal. Trying to purposfully induce alarm and distress in someone is, which is more in line with threats and the likes.

[Hekko]

Do you really think there should be a rule against insulting? It should be common sense (and I know it is) that you don't insult, and if an insult goes to far it can result in consequences. The point you are bringing up is just for the sake of bringing it up, you know it is nonsense.

I don't think there should be a rule against insulting.

However, if there is it won't mind that much (hell, I have a similar one in the GFT actually).

What is wrong is punishing someone for something that is not contrary to the rules.

Now that you say it, it's probably worthwhile to define the server options for matches.

And no, the point is certainly not nonsense. The organisers have yet again caved to a frivolous complaint and gone against their own rules in order to indulge it. It is stuff like this that the integrity of the tournament rests on, i.e. is it a NW tournament or an exercise in lobbying?

[Hadhod]

So in your opinion insulting should be allowed, right?

[MrSt3fan]

Do you really think there should be a rule against insulting? It should be common sense (and I know it is) that you don't insult, and if an insult goes to far it can result in consequences. The point you are bringing up is just for the sake of bringing it up, you know it is nonsense.

I don't think there should be a rule against insulting.

However, if there is it won't mind that much (hell, I have a similar one in the GFT actually).

What is wrong is punishing someone for something that is not contrary to the rules.

Now that you say it, it's probably worthwhile to define the server options for matches.

And no, the point is certainly not nonsense. The organisers have yet again caved to a frivolous complaint and gone against their own rules in order to indulge it. It is stuff like this that the integrity of the tournament rests on, i.e. is it a NW tournament or an exercise in lobbying?

Which rule did Bever and DasBrot go against ?

[JackieChan]

So I made my comment before and now 3 pages have been added. I actually bothered to read every single post only to find that I still do not know exactly what happened. What did Nutty say? I would like to know. Both sides have made valid points. It really is not in the rules, yet at the same time it should be fairly easy to guess that you should not insult. However, the really interesting part is, was that "insult" bannable? So could someone please quote Nutty or something of the like? My curiosity has been spiked.

[Hekko]

So in your opinion insulting should be allowed, right?

Because there is a mute function I believe that it's easier to let people decide from themselves when they no longer want to listen to someone, rather than have the organizers falling for frivolous complaints. The effect is the same, people won't have to read insults, but with no risk of the organizers making mistakes.

Please note, I am not saying people should go about insulting everywhere they go. It's not really good manners to do so. So don't say that I am defending the right to insult people. I am protecting people from being victims of miscarriages of justice.

Which rule did Bever and DasBrot go against ?

The negative version of the rules that exist for them. I.e. that they should not take action that isn't grounded in the rules. More explicitly I guess they have violated the rule about who is allowed to play for you (in the sense of no invites). Nutty isn't an invite therefore he should be eligible to play for us.

[Hadhod]

Well I'd like to know what Nutty actually said, so this issue can be resolved. Furthermore I'd like to have an official statement on insults, as for some people common sense and courtesy does not seem to exist.

[MrSt3fan]

The negative version of the rules that exist for them. I.e. that they should not take action that isn't grounded in the rules. More explicitly I guess they have violated the rule about who is allowed to play for you (in the sense of no invites). Nutty isn't an invite therefore he should be eligible to play for us.

The rules say invites are not allowed, they do not state that every member who is part of the regiment is eligible to play, and therefore Bever and Brot do not violate any rule at all.

Anyway lets wait until the video is online so we can actually see what Nutty did.

[Hekko]

Well I'd like to know what Nutty actually said, so this issue can be resolved. Furthermore I'd like to have an official statement on insults, as for some people common sense and courtesy does not seem to exist.

What he said or didn't say is completely irrelevant when there isn't a rule against it. So the video serves no purpose. I have seen it and it's generally just one enormous frivolous complaint anyway.

Any statement (Rule should be the word to be used here) regarding this would in all probability only take effect next season in line with map change rules and referees.

Common sense and courtesy are all very nice, but they are not a substitute for rules.

The rules say invites are not allowed, they do not state that every member who is part of the regiment is eligible to play, and therefore Bever and Brot do not violate any rule at all.

Anyway lets wait until the video is online so we can actually see what Nutty did.

The rule is another way of saying: only members from your regiment are allowed to play. He is a member of the regiment, therefore he is allowed to play.

As I said, what actually has been said is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

[MrSt3fan]

The rule is another way of saying: only members from your regiment are allowed to play. He is a member of the regiment, therefore he is allowed to play.

That is how you interpret it, but that is not what it says and therefore they are allowed to ban Nutty from the coming 4 NWL events without breaking any rule.

Anyway this discussion is not important (the one me and Hekko are having now) so I'll stop discussing this particular topic.

[Hadhod]

Well I'd like to know what Nutty actually said, so this issue can be resolved. Furthermore I'd like to have an official statement on insults, as for some people common sense and courtesy does not seem to exist.

What he said or didn't say is completely irrelevant when there isn't a rule against it. So the video serves no purpose. I have seen it and it's generally just one enormous frivolous complaint anyway.

Any statement (Rule should be the word to be used here) regarding this would in all probability only take effect next season in line with map change rules and referees.

Common sense and courtesy are all very nice, but they are not a substitute for rules.

The rules say invites are not allowed, they do not state that every member who is part of the regiment is eligible to play, and therefore Bever and Brot do not violate any rule at all.

Anyway lets wait until the video is online so we can actually see what Nutty did.

The rule is another way of saying: only members from your regiment are allowed to play. He is a member of the regiment, therefore he is allowed to play.

As I said, what actually has been said is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

If the organizers see the breach of common courtesy as severely enough such a punishment is fully acceptable.

[JackieChan]

I have seen some evidence now and I have to say that what he said would definitely have been bannable if there was such a rule as: Insults or disrespect towards individuals or groups will not be tolerated!

Yet, I do agree with Hekko. There is no such rule. Even if it is common sense not to insult, there is no rule against it, so theoretically he did nothing wrong. What I would do as organize is unban NuttyPig and add previously mentioned rule. If he or anyone else does it again the ban would be unchallengeble. Leaving the ban would most definitely be wrong in my opinion. That just feeds resent and hostile feelings and does not allow for change or betterment. That is part of the problem in this community. People are unwilling to forgive or forget and grant people another chance. That just makes those who are at the receiving end of the punishment feel more missunderstood and they will continue to act in the same manner or even worse.

Give him a chance and make the rule!

[Hekko]

That is how you interpret it, but that is not what it says and therefore they are allowed to ban Nutty from the coming 4 NWL events without breaking any rule.

Well, if we're going to follow the same obstinate line. There is no rule that says Nutty cannot play. Therefore he can play (they are the same thing, one is doubly negated of course). They are now changing that rule for 4 matches, however, rule changes by policy only take effect at the change of the season. So there you have it. As you say, this is driving it to the absurd though, since as I said. Implicitly the organizers (when acting in their capacity as organizers) are to act in a way defined by the rules.

If the organizers see the breach of common courtesy as severely enough such a punishment is fully acceptable.

How did you hallucinate this statement up? You may be a douche for not holding the door open for someone, but that does not make you liable to be punished. You may be a douche if you smoke indoors, but that does not make you liable to be punished. However, if there's a law forbidding indoor smoking, you're both a douche and liable to be punished. See the difference?


It's not about a second chance even to be honest, or being misunderstood, or forgiving or forgetting. It's the simplicity of the lack of rule. He is acting within the rules so there's nothing to forgive. People are of course allowed to remember and resent him for doing it of course. I mean, if you really are hellbent on clamping down on this you still have to let Nutty pass, change the rule. (And even then the rule would only take effect next season if it was to be congruent with previous promised rule changes)