Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > General Community > Rants and Flames

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 03-22-2013, 11:53 AM
getsome getsome is offline
Fire Giant

getsome's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frieza_Prexus [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
What I take issue with is the notion that incidental beneficiaries should be punished for actions that were not controlled by them. For example, if it is shown that Aiaus was acting along and surreptitiously, then it would be unfair to issue punishments to the rest of the guild. If you're going to assign vicarious liability (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respondeat_superior), it must be fairly done.

A prime example of an unfair application would be Perun's ninja looting of CT. To punish all of IB for Perun's actions, which clearly exceeded his authority and right, was unjust. (See: http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...5&postcount=79)
Everquest is not ruled by a court of law.

MFer exploited and his guild directly benefited.

btw your examples are fucking stupid. so I am playing football and I commit an infraction. Instead of moving my team back 10 yards, just make me line up 10 yards back.
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:24 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.