This suggestion is to clarify the meaning of the Altis Police Executions rule or revoke the ruling from Zulufighter's report.
This suggestion/clarification request is in response to a ban issued by James Travers against Zulufighter.
The issue with this report being actioned is that it draws a larger grey area between negligent deaths and intentional deaths.
This is important to players who play as police as we do not want to break the rules, and we almost certainly want to be banned for simple, honest mistakes.
The circumstances around Zulufighter's ban are sketchy at best. Zulufighter was under pressure, in underwater combat from Poseidon seadogs. He had collected multiple seadogs and was grouping them up when it was brought to his attention that another seadog was drowning.
Upon discovering this, Zulufighter responded accordingly and attempted to save the seadog, but it was too late.
Travers responds with "I don't think there is much of an excuse for doing what is seen in this clip. I am under the illusion that leaving one under the water for a prolonged period of time with their head below the water which leads to their death is in fact, execution by drowning."
Despite it being clear to the viewer of Zulufighters perspective that Zulufighter made a reasonable effort to attempt to preserve the life of the seadog.
There are several situations where an officer could be found breaking the executions rule. These are listed below, and not exhaustive.
- Leaving rebels in the open restrained where they could be caught in crossfire. If killed, is this execution?
- Driving above the speed limit while carrying civilian passengers, crashing and dying. This is negligent, but is it bannable?
- Shooting any player in the water and not attempting to or failing to rescue them because you don't have appropriate equipment.
I personally think that there is only one option to solve this, and that is for the staff team to affirm that only INTENTIONAL acts to execute players are rule breaks.
All NEGLIGENT deaths should not be considered rule breaks and should be taken to Police Complaints.
I feel in this case police players have been issued a massive blow which could be abused by report-warrior members or unfairly issued a ban because of a simple mistake while playing a computer game.
This suggestion/clarification request is in response to a ban issued by James Travers against Zulufighter.
The issue with this report being actioned is that it draws a larger grey area between negligent deaths and intentional deaths.
This is important to players who play as police as we do not want to break the rules, and we almost certainly want to be banned for simple, honest mistakes.
The circumstances around Zulufighter's ban are sketchy at best. Zulufighter was under pressure, in underwater combat from Poseidon seadogs. He had collected multiple seadogs and was grouping them up when it was brought to his attention that another seadog was drowning.
Upon discovering this, Zulufighter responded accordingly and attempted to save the seadog, but it was too late.
Travers responds with "I don't think there is much of an excuse for doing what is seen in this clip. I am under the illusion that leaving one under the water for a prolonged period of time with their head below the water which leads to their death is in fact, execution by drowning."
Despite it being clear to the viewer of Zulufighters perspective that Zulufighter made a reasonable effort to attempt to preserve the life of the seadog.
There are several situations where an officer could be found breaking the executions rule. These are listed below, and not exhaustive.
- Leaving rebels in the open restrained where they could be caught in crossfire. If killed, is this execution?
- Driving above the speed limit while carrying civilian passengers, crashing and dying. This is negligent, but is it bannable?
- Shooting any player in the water and not attempting to or failing to rescue them because you don't have appropriate equipment.
I personally think that there is only one option to solve this, and that is for the staff team to affirm that only INTENTIONAL acts to execute players are rule breaks.
All NEGLIGENT deaths should not be considered rule breaks and should be taken to Police Complaints.
I feel in this case police players have been issued a massive blow which could be abused by report-warrior members or unfairly issued a ban because of a simple mistake while playing a computer game.
