This is a textbook case of imposed morality—a futile tug-of-war over whose time is being "rightfully" wasted more. At its core, this approach feels less about creating fairness and more about punishing people simply for the sake of it, ultimately alienating the player base rather than fostering a sense of community. Strict and rigid rules like these do more harm than good. If people feel they're being unfairly boxed in or punished for natural, human behavior, the inevitable outcome is burnout and quitting.

These kinds of punitive measures are never healthy for anyone involved. Trying to trap players into false "good faith" obligations, where they're expected to stick around or endure out of some moral ideal, is not only unrealistic—it’s actively damaging. It's comparable to the flawed mentality that says, "Oh, you have a mentor crown, so you're morally obligated to help me." These are one-sided entitlements with no basis, designed to guilt people into compliance with arbitrary standards.

In the end, forcing these expectations creates a toxic environment, not a cooperative one. If the goal is to foster trust and collaboration, imposed morality is the opposite of what’s needed. Encouraging people to act freely, without fear of guilt or retribution, is the only way to build a truly supportive community. Anything else is just a power trip disguised as "rules."