[Question] Ruling/Rules Clarification

[Glen-Rhodes]

There are no rules against a lot of possible things that we have to look at on an irregular basis. Which is why we've been empowered to use good judgment, and why we've been specifically instructed to blow off rules lawyers requesting detailed lists.

You guys have decided that some all-encompassing "blackmail" is now against the rules. But players have been blackmailing each other for many years on this game. So, I think I'm well within my rights to ask for clarification on what you guys think "blackmail" is, and why, if it's such a serious issue that automatically warrants DEAT, it's not in the actual rules.

And, yes, Mekhet, I am referring to the former. Real blackmail is already illegal. Threatening to crack a regional password is not real-world blackmail, nor is it even against the broadest laws against password cracking, despite what NS armchair lawyers believe.

[Reploid Productions]

There are no rules against a lot of possible things that we have to look at on an irregular basis. Which is why we've been empowered to use good judgment, and why we've been specifically instructed to blow off rules lawyers requesting detailed lists.

You guys have decided that some all-encompassing "blackmail" is now against the rules. But players have been blackmailing each other for many years on this game. So, I think I'm well within my rights to ask for clarification on what you guys think "blackmail" is, and why, if it's such a serious issue that automatically warrants DEAT, it's not in the actual rules.

And, yes, Mekhet, I am referring to the former. Real blackmail is already illegal. Threatening to crack a regional password is not real-world blackmail, nor is it even against the broadest laws against password cracking, despite what NS armchair lawyers believe.

Blackmail threats that involve an illegal-by-our-scripting-rules tool = pretty much against the site rules. It's also something that has come up precisely once in site's lifetime. In-game political blackmail is a rather different beast entirely. When in doubt, report the situation and moderation will take a look.

[Ballotonia]

To clarify further: please do not confuse in-game activities like blackmail / threatening to kill your opponents RP character / invading / etc... which are typically OK (I really can't think of an example that wouldn't be, but can't be 100% sure, ask when in doubt), with out-of-game activities like RL blackmail / threatening to kill a player / invading a player's RL home which are always against the rules and not just NS rules. They're very, very different, and you're supposed to be able to understand the difference easily.

Some examples:
OK: "If you do not withdraw that Liberation proposal, I will try to recruit all members of your region to elsewhere."
OK: "If you do not withdraw that Liberation proposal, I will try to invade your home region."
Not OK: "If you do not withdraw that Liberation proposal, I will hack your nation or regional password."
Not OK: "If you do not buy me stamps, I will try to invade your home region."
Double Not OK: "If you do not buy me stamps, I will hack your nation or regional password."

For your convenience, the problematic parts have been underlined. In-game vs out-of-game, know the difference

Ballotonia

[The greater Vakolicci Haven]

To clarify further: please do not confuse in-game activities like blackmail / threatening to kill your opponents RP character / invading / etc... which are typically OK (I really can't think of an example that wouldn't be, but can't be 100% sure, ask when in doubt), with out-of-game activities like RL blackmail / threatening to kill a player / invading a player's RL home which are always against the rules and not just NS rules. They're very, very different, and you're supposed to be able to understand the difference easily.

Some examples:
OK: "If you do not withdraw that Liberation proposal, I will try to recruit all members of your region to elsewhere."
OK: "If you do not withdraw that Liberation proposal, I will try to invade your home region."
Not OK: "If you do not withdraw that Liberation proposal, I will hack your nation or regional password."
Not OK: "If you do not buy me stamps, I will try to invade your home region."
Double Not OK: "If you do not buy me stamps, I will hack your nation or regional password."

For your convenience, the problematic parts have been underlined. In-game vs out-of-game, know the difference

Ballotonia

So, it's better if we manage to trick people into giving us their regional passwords, like all raider groups like to do? Leads to the same results.

[Capitalist Producers]

Moderation engages in judgment calls. This was a correct judgment call.

Good judgement is always good in the eye of the one that wields it. Those watching from the sidelines may not see it that way.

Had the moderator(s) involved taken a deep breath and a moment to think this one through perhaps we would not be having this conversation. This isn't like homeland security at the border or an airport. A simple conversation with the offending nation regarding whether or not the threat was even practical, let alone serous, would have cleared this up.

But no. Instead Nation States loses one of its best contributors and NS++ will more then likely go dark.

[Ankhora]

Moderation engages in judgment calls. This was a correct judgment call.

Good judgement is always good in the eye of the one that wields it. Those watching from the sidelines may not see it that way.

Had the moderator(s) involved taken a deep breath and a moment to think this one through perhaps we would not be having this conversation. This isn't like homeland security at the border or an airport. A simple conversation with the offending nation regarding whether or not the threat was even practical, let alone serous, would have cleared this up.

But no. Instead Nation States loses one of its best contributors and NS++ will more then likely go dark.

Yes, In think this may of been rather hasty of a decision. I think that constitutes a warning but not really much else.

[NERVUN]

Moderation engages in judgment calls. This was a correct judgment call.

Good judgement is always good in the eye of the one that wields it. Those watching from the sidelines may not see it that way.

Had the moderator(s) involved taken a deep breath and a moment to think this one through perhaps we would not be having this conversation. This isn't like homeland security at the border or an airport. A simple conversation with the offending nation regarding whether or not the threat was even practical, let alone serous, would have cleared this up.

But no. Instead Nation States loses one of its best contributors and NS++ will more then likely go dark.

We take threats very seriously. We've stated that repeatedly because we have to. This isn't a gray area for us simply because we're unwilling to gamble with someone's safety in terms of physical threats, or the integrity of the game in terms of hacking threats.