Suggestion Write rules protecting Bounty Hunters invading Dominion threads without faction permission

[Csariden]

I think protection just means it's explicitly stated in the rules that bounty hunters can join these threads to hunt. Csariden




The way this is worded sounds to me like the implication is the rule might be added to protect harassment, which it's not and it's weird to me that the phrasing you used emphasizes being protected from reports specifically.

The wording of the poll is

"Write rules protecting Bounty Hunters invading Dominion threads without faction permission"

So I'm trying to figure out what exactly the bounty hunters are to be protected from exactly if they enter without faction permission. Reports was the only thing that came to mind, it is a genuine question.

Edit: the verbiage seems to be protecting the bounty hunter from the faction, because they can already hunt in a dominion if they have the faction's permission.

 

[Sahan Dragr]

It giving “you can’t sit with us” that extends beyond the bounty hunter convo

Hmmm... Fair point.

 

[Mauve]

This is why my bounty hunter would be a member of every faction. :|

 

[Jend-Ro Quill]

If this does get written up, my 'wish list' so far:

• Clear idea of what prefix tags are fair game, either a list or an 'all except-'
• A line on what happens if someone turns off their bounty toggle after someone posts hunting for them.
• Maybe a line on factions using the mechanism as an excuse to mess with other factions' threads.
• Maybe a line encouraging faction leaders to be ready to roll with this kind of thing instead of imploding when it happens.

 

[Aether Verd]

Tefka - According to le Google, September is Color Blind Awareness Month.

Themoreyouknow

 

[Razmir Tezhyn]

If this does get written up, my 'wish list' so far:

• Clear idea of what prefix tags are fair game, either a list or an 'all except-'
• A line on what happens if someone turns off their bounty toggle after someone posts hunting for them.
• Maybe a line on factions using the mechanism as an excuse to mess with other factions' threads.
• Maybe a line encouraging faction leaders to be ready to roll with this kind of thing instead of imploding when it happens.

+1 +1 +1 +1
even a +2

 

[Velzari Tharn]

So I'm trying to figure out what exactly the bounty hunters are to be protected from exactly if they enter without faction permission. Reports was the only thing that came to mind, it is a genuine question.

I’m inclined to believe that the protections would either safeguard a bounty hunter from being reported, or prevent factions from gatekeeping bounty hunters from their dominions, or both.

Either way, I think it’s up to each writer whether or not they toggle bounty hunters on/off. The toggle is an open invitation. It’s the permission for hunters to invade. Is it more convenient for them to coordinate that invasion beforehand? Perhaps. But by choosing to toggle it on, you’re consenting to the possibility that a hunter might step up on your turf when you least expect it - which is precisely how a bounty hunter should behave.

They still can’t kill you or call shots without your permission, toggle or not.

 

[Tefka]

So I'm trying to figure out what exactly the bounty hunters are to be protected from exactly

claims that you can't be in the thread

lmfao

this is why any poll to write more rules is always a slam dunk

 

[Tefka]

According to le Google, September is Color Blind Awareness Month.

nope the hispanics and suicide preventers have that month

pick another month

 

[Aether Verd]

Memes aside, been hmming about this for a wee bit and I've landed on: fuck it, we ball.

My suggestion for the rule would be simple:

• The Hunter needs to post in the Bounty thread, stating intent to go after the mark in question.
• The Hunter must hyperlink the Bounty somewhere in their opening post when entering a non-Private thread.

This way, if someone ignored one of those infamous "you're the faction staff of the major I hate" bounties, they'd get a heads up before their latest expansion is interrupted. They can decide, before sparks fly, is this the life I want to live?

 

[Tefka]

Memes aside, been hmming about this for a wee bit and I've landed on: fuck it, we ball.

My suggestion for the rule would be simple:

• The Hunter needs to post in the Bounty thread, stating intent to go after the mark in question.
• The Hunter must hyperlink the Bounty somewhere in their opening post when entering a non-Private thread.

This way, if someone ignored one of those infamous "you're the faction staff of the major I hate" bounties, they'd get a heads up before their latest expansion is interrupted. They can decide, before sparks fly, is this the life I want to live?

this dude just ducked out of supporting color blind people

 

[Kyric]

If this does get written up, my 'wish list' so far:

• Clear idea of what prefix tags are fair game, either a list or an 'all except-'
• A line on what happens if someone turns off their bounty toggle after someone posts hunting for them.
• Maybe a line on factions using the mechanism as an excuse to mess with other factions' threads.
• Maybe a line encouraging faction leaders to be ready to roll with this kind of thing instead of imploding when it happens.

I do a little +3

 

[Aether Verd]

this dude just ducked out of supporting color blind people

I'm not colorblind, my support isn't making it to the polls

 

[Jend-Ro Quill]

The Hunter needs to post in the Bounty thread, stating intent to go after the mark in question.

I mean this with zero attitude: since the overlap between posted bounties and red tags probably isn't large, if this were the form the rule were to take, I'd immediately create the Red Corner Bounty Brokerage and post a standing bounty on everyone with a red bounty toggle in some IC-framed way, to ensure there'd actually be a way to check off the paperwork of going after someone with a bounty toggle.

 

[Tefka]

I'd immediately create the Red Corner Bounty Brokerage and post a standing bounty on everyone with a red corner tag in some IC-framed way, to ensure there'd actually be a way to check off the paperwork of going after someone with a corner tag.

Don't get involved I got this, if you get burned out again I'm going to kill you.

 

[Tefka]

I mean this with zero attitude: since the overlap between posted bounties and red tags probably isn't large, if this were the form the rule were to take, I'd immediately create the Red Corner Bounty Brokerage and post a standing bounty on everyone with a red bounty toggle in some IC-framed way, to ensure there'd actually be a way to check off the paperwork of going after someone with a bounty toggle.

I know you got grand fixes and ideas but you know these people will let you down in the end lmao please let me handle it this is what I'm best suited for.

 

[Tefka]

I'm not colorblind, my support isn't making it to the polls

I need people to know I don't support this person's opinion, colorblind people DO matter, and I will always support you people

 

[Jend-Ro Quill]

people will let you down in the end

At which point the Red Corner Bounty Brokerage will come for their souls

 

[Darth Kentarch]

Aether Verd , When I told you I was gonna psyop this issue, UH. I did not expect it to blow up like this.

 

[Aether Verd]

Darth Kentarch why do I listen to you????