Originally Posted by
Kitkat
You're arguing semantics here at this point. The kill isn't really the issue so much as the fact the person is being malicious about it. Stating that their primary purpose is to interrupt your activity is the primary point, which is against ToS. Him killing the mobs is the same thing as you taking a yellow NM, there isn't claim to it thus it is "fair game."
The point you're trying to prove above all else is that he follows you, stays near you, waits for the chance, then purposely disrupts what you are doing. Doesn't matter why your are doing it, it only matters that he is hindering you from doing so and has stated as much. Simply claiming an unclaimed mob is only the tactic used, the intent behind the tactic is what is in question.
Scenario A: If group A is cleaving a specific group of mobs and then group B comes in the do the same thing which results in people running in and cleaving the opposite groups mobs the issue falls under the "fair claim" loophole.
Scenario B: Same scenario as above, but mix an NM into it such as tunga. Now Group B wants to disrupt Group A by purposely pulling an NM on top of them then dying so aggro on group A occurs. This is seen as malicious behavior.
Scenario C: Now, once again same scenario as first. The difference being there is no Group B, only Individual B. Individual B is in the same area as Group A with the intent to disrupt what Group A is doing. Individual B sends /tells or types something in /say belaying this intent to someone in Group A. Individual B uses the Loophole "Unclaimed = fair game" to disrupt Group A's activities by use of AOE kill shots, or AOE claim spells but instead of killing individual B runs to conflux to lose aggro and cause force despawn of the mobs. This continues to occur for hours and multiple times.
The reason this differs from 2 groups fighting over claims is the intent and motive behind each others actions:
Scenario A: Group B's motives are the same as Group A's, to farm large groups of enemies for xp/cruor/items. A GM has little to no reason to reprimand Group B for running in and stealing unclaimed mobs off Group A.
Scenario B: Both groups are there for the same reason, but this time Group B is breaking ToS by purposely MPKing group A in order to hinder them. A GM has fair reason to warn/jail/ban the individual in Group B or the entire group based on findings.
Scenario C: Group A has motive to farm xp/cruor/items, but Individual B has no similar motive. Individual B has come with the intent to not only impede Group A, but make it known to Group A that is their purpose for doing so. Individual B has said something in /say or /tell to relay their intent and motives to Group A. Through investigation a GM has fair reason to dictate that this is a form of harassment meant to impede, disrupt, and cause distress on Group A through their actions.
The crutch on Scenario C is not just the GM, but what information anyone from Group A can provide to the GM so they can properly investigate the accusations. If the GM cannot find valid proof showing the intent of Individual B through the chat logs then the GM is unable to fulfill conditions that needs to be met before they proceed to correct the problem. This breaks down to the old saying "If you didn't document it, it didn't happen" (anyone in record keeping will know this reference) thus if the GM takes action without locating proof first they are only placing themselves in a position where they will get reprimanded.
This is why it is important for the person making a GM call to not have anything showing that they baited the person they made the call on in. You must also keep track of all interactions between you and the person you made the call on.
Ask yourself these questions before making a call:
Q: Did the person send you a /tell or type something in /say? If so, what and when?
Why:This information is needed to make searching through chat logs easier as you give a window of time, which chat channels the GM has to look through, and what it is a GM needs in order to find the information.
Q: When did this start, and how long has it been going on?
Why: This allows the GM to once again look over a specific span of time to gauge how serious the nature of the issue is.
Q: Did you say anything in response, positive or negative, to the individual in question?
Why: This will go to show the GM if you further instigated the problem, or if the person was being malicious without justification showing their only intent was to disrupt a group/individual that fit a certain criteria. If you further instigated the issue there is a chance that the issue will, at best, result in only a written warning. At worst, the issue will never go further than the initial call due to information found.
Q: What, if anything, have you done to avoid this individual? Have you Blisted them, tried different areas, times, mobs? Did they follow you to different mobs/zones/times?
Why: This will further prove malicious intent behind the actions as the person is following you with no other motive aside from hindering your progress which is part of the definition of Harassment.
The more information you have available for a GM at the time of a call, the more likely you are to see results from the call. Another thing to keep in mind is the number of calls in the past you've place about this person including any dates/times and GM spoke to. I'm sure GMs are required to keep records of all calls they answer, but this would be something that they may or may not specifically give information on if asked directly depending on policies.
(0)
Reply With Quote
