Quote:
Originally Posted by Orruar
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
1) A majority of people would vote to enslave a minority for their own benefit. Doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. It's why America was founded as a Constitutional republic instead of a pure democracy.
2) I voted no and I'm the only one in my guild, so your assumption about only those in top guilds voting no is wrong. Some of us actually think that the players should work things out for themselves. Usually it starts with being reasonable and treating the other party as a reasonable person. A few things can cause this to break down rather quickly, which leads me to my next point.
3) When people think they can gain an advantage by bringing a GM into it, they will be less likely to try and work things out with their fellow player. If you're basically saying that a JCP rule will be put into place if people fight over spawns enough, and you already noted the popularity of the JCP rule, what do you think is going to happen?
Once you intervene here, you're going to be dragged in deeper and deeper. It's like a war. Either nuke the place, or don't get involved. There is no good middle ground. If you get a petition over some camp dispute at pawbuster, ae DT everyone in the area and despawn the warlord room for 48 hours, or do nothing. Anything in between will just lead to a bigger headache tomorrow.
|
This is a bunch of existential rhetoric that addresses none of the actual reasons why it's a good rule. All you do is hypothetically argue why it might be a bad idea if EQ were a country and camps were human rights violations. It isn't, they aren't, and meaningless phrases like "there is no middle ground" are based on nothing but how good they would sound on a bumper sticker. Bumper stickers aren't exactly paragons of seminal thought.