Politician Archive
Thread: The Day They Saved a Player City All Others Tough Luck
Eclipse_Rahvun wrote:
If you choose a slicer to give 9 pieces of armor you just bought and he decides to break the SOE rules and take off with your armor,you just get to deal with it?
If you pay a doctor 10k for a buff and he only buffs one stat and refuses to continue buffing you, is it your fault for choosing that doctor? just deal with it?
After reading all the posts, I edited my response and will simply say that right thing was done imo.
But the dev's have placed this half coded, half working, bug infested player city and polician code and then just left it there for griefers to take advantage of. They do have a responsiblity now to paying customers to make sure that does not happen.
Message Edited by RellikCro on 03-20-2004 10:47 PM
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
Eclipse_Rahvun wrote:
If you choose a slicer to give 9 pieces of armor you just bought and he decides to break the SOE rules and take off with your armor,you just get to deal with it?
If you pay a doctor 10k for a buff and he only buffs one stat and refuses to continue buffing you, is it your fault for choosing that doctor? just deal with it?
Yes, it is. I could have asked for a pay by piece policy allowing me to insure that the most I would have lost would be1 piece or 1 buff. I could have asked to speak with some previous customers and gotten a garuntee that this person is an honorable merchant. I could have done any number of things to prevent this from happening. However I chose not to and after I clicked ok the items or credits change hands and it is my fault for that. If they return them then great, if they keep them then I shall make a post on the galaxy boards warning others of the player and possibly giving him a reputation that will prevent any future business.
As per the rest of your post. The entire town decided to give him complete power over them. That means that his actions are a result of their actions. George W. Bush could use the football to send an ICBM square into the heart of Chicago right now, killing my family as well as many others. Will he do it? I hope not. Can he do it? Yes because we delegated him to an office that provided him with that power. Not knowing someone is going to double cross you is simply a sad state of affairs when the deed is done but that does not mean the victim is completely innocent of any guilt. I am sorry but we must simply disagree on this matter. I feel that you should have peacably resolved this with the mayor or barring that rebuilt from the ashes that he caused due to you alloting him the power to turn your town into ashes.
As per me not getting a shuttleport leave me where I was. I don't care if you are a rank 5 or rank 1 town I would have the same view towards it, your loss would have just been at an exponentiallydifferent level. Also, please describe to me how someone not getting the chance for their city to update due in part to them having put in a large deal of effort and having a good mayor is not detrimental to them? True they do not go down but any chance of them rising is squashed.
Actually that is against SOE policy and called Griefing... unless you like griefing, but I do not. Also the president example is interesting... see if he did that.. as sad as it would be and almost impossible has he himself is not the one that "pushes the button" but has to go thru several, very intelligent, members of the govt before he could even attempt it.. but lets just look past that for a minute and focus on IF he did it.
We, as citizens, would be able to IMEDIATELY impeach him without worry of him "clicking on the destroy button" on the whitehouse and having it and the whole US gong "poof" gone. So yes there are huge differences in your analogy.
PsychoticChipmunk wrote:
No, they elected a person that was willing to gamble away the gameplay experiences of a town full of people for a piddly sum on E-bay violating the TOS. They wouldn't have had to live with the new person playing that character because it was being deleted. Their mayor broke SOE rules and got caught which could have cost the town dearly (anyone know what would happen if the incumbent no longer exists come election day?) but it is their fault that he is mayor. They could have put someone who was going to stick with the game for a lot longer or someone that would have explained how they wanted to leave and help find a replacement. They didn't and this happened. It is a poor situation but I personally don't see howanyone in that sort ofbindshould be "saved" by CSR. Maybe I just have a different take on responsibility then the majority of you but that is just how I feel.
Yes you do have a different take on responsiblity. This is a game, there is absolutely no way for anyone to know when someone will just quit, stop showing up, or delete their character. Now any of these actions (which if you have been reading other posts have happened and towns have "poofed" gone and been rebuilt) would not be enough to bring in a CSR to take action as none of these violate any rules of SOE. Nor is SOE directly responsible for what happened to your city. BUT when an account HAS violated the SOE TOS and has to be banned THEN SOE does indeed have a direct impact on the enviroment of other paying customers and does have the RESPONSIBLITY to make sure they do not affect them negatively with that banning.
As always, I'm the last one to the thread, and probably haven't read enough
Just want to echo Positronic's point with my own experience - I'm the Mayor of Zhadum/Mos Casia on Eclipse, and I'm envious of Positronic. I have been trying to get replaced for six weeks now - granted it took me over a week to find someone willing to devote the skillpoints to run against me, but it's rediculously hard to replace an incumbent. I campaign for him with daily citywide emails *begging* people to come vote. I make cutesy 50k withdrawls from our treasury and report it as "Cantinagirls need presents"...
Now, I understand that a lot of cities engaged it trading ghost-citizens cross server to pad their totals so they could grow. We never did that. But we did have a couple of guilds disband, many of those players have quit the game or moved to new servers. Im probably the only Mayor in the game looking forward to the time bomb that goes off in three days, when all inactive citizens get removed. It means I'll lose a BUNCH of votes, hopefully enough to finally free up my skillpoints.
Fact is, after March 24th, this type of CSR intervention *hopefully* wont be needed anymore, as voting out an incumbent should become much easier without all the inactives padding the incumbent's totals. But until that happens, in the status quo the Mayor is pretty much invincible.
Really, all these cases are examples of why the game needs to include a /resign command, and treat banned Mayors as having /resigned as well. That would solve the problem here.
-saj
Rorenikibi wrote:
All I am hearing from these other cities is p*nis envy over not watching someone else's hard work fall to dust in favor of theirs. Really quite pitiful.
There have been alot of flames about this and that. Time to remind some folks what the issue is.
I am fully aware that I cannot get the CSR to go back on their decision, and I'm fully aware that nothing will change. What I want to remind you all of is the issue of CSR intervention, and the reasons to which a city can fall. Its a fun issue, and one that should be discussed here, and not kept quietly in the shadows.
Unfortunately, those from Caserta have felt a need to call this "witch hunt" and "I didn't know the facts." Well, I'm not sure what you think I'm hunting, and if I didn't get all the facts, I was darn close without being directly involved, yes?
The issue is (bum bum bum), Legitimate Reasons on why a City can fall. Bot Houses are being dealt with in their own right, but what of the bad mayor. I say its a valid reason for a City to fall (decrease in size, AGAIN, not full blown destruction to a pile of ashes).
Also, once again, I appreciate anyone's post who doesn't agree with me. This is a topic that deals with why a City can fall ("decrease in size" for the overly paranoid). If you posted on why you think the CSR was right in this matter (even if you felt it was indeed an exception), then I thank you for posting. What I certainly don't care for is the flaming of me for even posting the issue. Its uncalled for, and more importantly, off topic.
<--- fully supports a dynamic Player City environment with many reasons to allow the "top 10" on each planet to fluctuate greatly.