>>> New mail has arrived from: Core. >>> Subject: Reinstate (unnuke) Pounder Nuran grumbles as he stamps a letter and puts it in a box. mail InterCity Mailer v3.2 [? for help] 1 Gizmaluke (Sun Mar 13) Clanmail: Rules and stuff... 2 Gizmaluke (Sun Mar 13) Clanmail: Rules and stuff... 3 Drogian (Thu Nov 3) your report 4 Rambler@Esgaroth (Mon Feb 13) Fuiki and Gristwen 5 Rambler@Esgaroth (Mon Feb 13) part 2 6 Drille@Edoras (Tue Feb 14) Fuiki 7 Krunx@Combe (Thu Mar 30) armoury access 8 Core (Tue May 2) asdf 9 Rambler@Adornas (Fri Jul 14) . 10 Rambler@Adornas (Fri Jul 14) sotpotusa 11 Tire@Bree (Thu Sep 21) RE: hi 12 Core (Fri Sep 22) fdd U >13 Core (Fri Sep 22) Reinstate (unnuke) Pounder [13 of 13]& 13 Autosave. Item #13 To : Core From : Core Date : Fri Sep 22 07:55:29 2006 Subject: Reinstate (unnuke) Pounder =================================== Dear citizens of Arda, Please feel free to edit the original text written by Tire and modified by the people after him. In the list before sending it to Draugluin and forwarding it Drogian, Pharazon and Thingol. Please, forward the appeal to as many people as you can. If you want, you can try to add up the arguments listed in the following thread of the logpage: http://logs.dyndns.dk/comments.php/10835 AH, and, don't forget to sign under the other names in the list. Don't remove them! ____ ____ ____ Powers and PoAL, The purpose of this mail is indeed to have it sent to you en masse-not as spam, but as a demonstrable show of solidarity between the majority of the playerbase and Pounder. I am writing it because I feel that any measure which may, no matter the outcome, bring Pounder back must be pursued, in the name of a just and fair system of governance of this social order. My (and any others who mail in this letter) knowledge of Pounders past discipline history not withstanding, the reason you gave for his nuke was "grossly inappropriate attacks, slurs, profane insults; continued pattern of behaviour; too many warnings/bans". It is on that basis that I lay my first objection. First, no matter what the history of comm violations/warnings, you yourself said that you would not nuke over comm policy violations (During either the 7th or the 8th event when you gave Pounder the wheelspin… the result was "nuke", but you allowed him to spin again to get leprosy, giving the reason that you would not nuke for comm. Policy violations.) I fully concur with this policy, though you seem to have not kept to it. No matter what Pounder said on the comm, even if he directed it at a specific personality (I am given the understanding that he addressed his comments to "someone"… ie "Someone's mother is an incestuous whore"… and unless he established a subject prior to the comment, the only way one could claim the comment was directed at him would be through a guilty conscience) a fully adequate consequence for such actions would be a comm ban. I say this because his transgressions were fully contained within the comm; removing him from that venue would fully prevent him from continuing any offensive behaviour. If he persisted in behaviour you categorized as objectionable following a comm ban, you may have a slightly more reasonable basis for nuke. Clearly his prior offences were not sufficiently grievous to warrant perm banning him from the comm; you have effectively ignored a valid and effective means of correcting a problem in favour of a much more harsh measure. Equally as important as why an alternative punishment was more appropriate to Pounders supposed transgression is the reason that nuke was too harsh. Some have said that "no one's legendary status/advanced age/affable personality can mitigate punishable charges." While this is true, the nature of the punishment differs from person to person. A nuke for a level 1 character with 15 minutes age means nothing. It erases 15 minutes of progress, and it can be regenerated in… 15 minutes. The name is not even permanently blocked. In the same vein of thought, nuking a 30d old character is vastly different in weight than nuking a 300d old character. All of Exide's characters combined did not total up to 355d; the reputation and history behind all of his characters combined did not make a reputation even approaching that of Pounder. To continue with that thought, any character Exide could ever make in the future would not satisfy these descriptors; were he given 2 years of open access to the mud (I say 2 because he was a very active bugger) I doubt he could accumulate 355d aging and a reputation to match Pounders. The point that I make with this comparison is that Exide, for instance, was perm banned from the game for some particularly vile cheating (I have an idea as to its nature, but its details are irrelevant). He was sitebanned-a significantly more harsh punishment, supposedly, than merely a single nuking. However, in suffering this punishment, he was punished to a far lesser extent than Pounder. Do you think it fair that you inflict a punishment greater in weight than a siteban on a player for comm. Infractions? Particularly when you have lesser means of discipline available and unexplored? In the interests of brevity (however in vain they may be) I'll not cite any more of the innumerable arguments supporting a commutation of Pounders nuke to a less serious punishment (such as a comm ban or removal of tongue). The last point I wish to express is Pounders importance to the MUD. He is a T2T institution; a vital part of the history of the MUD. Ninety-one players of this MUD of significance sufficient to warrant a permanent legend have left, and with them, the history they represent. Pounder is equal of any of these players, and he has (or had, at the very least) the desire to stay with the community. He's not just a player, he's living documentation of events which deserve to be remembered but without him would be forgotten. Do not drive away more of our community's history. I'm sure you will make the choice in the best interests of the MUD. ~ Tire, the silvan Core, the Beorning [13 of 13]& q