Mails
| From: | 1F616EMO |
|---|---|
| To: | RelaxingPlay, y5nw, HelenasaurusRex, mary4, Elementalcraft, jingkaimori, Vedu_0825 |
| Date: | 2024-12-16 14:12:31 |
| Subject: | Draft of Rules of Newcomers' Plots |
| (Sending to all helpers and moderators, sorry if I missed anyone)
I drafted the Rules of Newcomers' Plots (https://wiki-twi.1f616emo.xyz/s/S). It aimed to simplify and replace regional rules that implement regulations on newcomers' plots. There is one practical change between the old rules and the new rules. Under the old rules (for both Spawn South and SmushyVille), if all buildings on a plot are left unfinished for 30 consecutive days, the plot can be taken back (which I never exercised). Under the new rules, this is done if the builds are apparently unfinished and if the owner hasn't logged in for 30 days. The word "apparently" was added to exclude plots having an acceptable look and practical functions but not yet finished, but the definition of "apparently unfinished" is debatable. For example, builds on 6E Sakura Road, Spawn South by Ezra (only having a basic frame) are apparently unfinished, but it would be hard to determine whether builds on 2E Spawn Avenue South, Spawn South by Kiki1 (with a seemingly finished front door but unfinished as a whole) are apparently unfinished. May I hear your opinions on this? | |
| From: | y5nw |
|---|---|
| To: | 1F616EMO, RelaxingPlay, HelenasaurusRex, mary4, Elementalcraft, jingkaimori, Vedu_0825 |
| Date: | 2024-12-16 21:30:08 |
| Subject: | Re: Draft of Rules of Newcomers' Plots |
|
> I drafted the Rules of Newcomers' Plots (https://wiki-twi.1f616emo.xyz/s/S). It aimed to simplify and replace regional rules that implement regulations on newcomers' plots. > > There is one practical change between the old rules and the new rules. Under the old rules (for both Spawn South and SmushyVille), if all buildings on a plot are left unfinished for 30 consecutive days, the plot can be taken back (which I never exercised). Under the new rules, this is done if the builds are apparently unfinished and if the owner hasn't logged in for 30 days. There is a minor issue in the draft: in 1.2 of "Taking back unused plots", "and the owner (or any co-owners) hasn't been online for 30 days" looks problematic IMO: a plot owned by two players could potentially be taken back if one of the two players becomes inactive, even if the other continues to actively play on the server. IMO "the owner (and every co-owner) hasn't been online for 30 days" would be better. > The word "apparently" was added to exclude plots having an acceptable look and practical functions but not yet finished, but the definition of "apparently unfinished" is debatable. For example, builds on 6E Sakura Road, Spawn South by Ezra (only having a basic frame) are apparently unfinished, but it would be hard to determine whether builds on 2E Spawn Avenue South, Spawn South by Kiki1 (with a seemingly finished front door but unfinished as a whole) are apparently unfinished. IMO we can keep some cases as examples of what would (or would not) qualify as appearing to be (partially) finished. Some other ideas: * An additional period could be introduced to allow players to respond to the oncoming eviction. The eviciton [sic] can then be re-evaluated if the player resumes work on the building (e.g. after having forgotten about the building or due to inactivity for other reasons, see below). The plot is taken back only after this period expires. * The eviction/tolerance can be extended (i.e. the player can keep the plot for longer) if the player can sufficiently explain the inactivity and show that they are able to complete the project, such as - by showing plans (and, importantly, proving their ability to carry out the plan) for the building as well as when the construction can appear to be (sufficiently) completed; - by showing that the project is delayed due to unavoidable external factors in the 30-day period that the player have little influence over (e.g. RL issues); or - by showing that the player has (in the given period) a different focus that is relevant to the completion or the function of a building. | |
| From: | 1F616EMO |
|---|---|
| To: | y5nw, RelaxingPlay, HelenasaurusRex, mary4, Elementalcraft, jingkaimori, Vedu_0825 |
| Date: | 2024-12-16 22:53:38 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Draft of Rules of Newcomers' Plots |
|
> > I drafted the Rules of Newcomers' Plots ... > > > > There is one practical change ... > > There is a minor issue in the draft: in 1.2 of "Taking back unused plots", "and the owner (or any co-owners) hasn't been online for 30 days" looks problematic IMO: a plot owned by two players could potentially be taken back if one of the two players becomes inactive, even if the other continues to actively play on the server. > > IMO "the owner (and every co-owner) hasn't been online for 30 days" would be better. Thank you for the correction. Applied in revision 4150 (https://wiki-twi.1f616emo.xyz/s/T). > > The word "apparently" was added ... > > IMO we can keep some cases as examples of what would (or would not) qualify as appearing to be (partially) finished. I'd prefer recording down every plot revocation (like what we do for rules violations) and judging in a loose "case law" system, i.e. it's not necessary to 100% follow precedents, but they are strong references. I am not writing statutes because I can only act according to them, but (1) to prevent me from abusing my power (kinda like constitutional monarchy, but I reserve the right to be absolute) and (2) to properly grant moderators rights and guide them how to exercise their rights. That's why I prefer case law over in-detail statutory law. > Some other ideas: > * An additional period could be introduced to allow players to respond to the oncoming eviction. The eviciton [sic] can then be re-evaluated if the player resumes work on the building (e.g. after having forgotten about the building or due to inactivity for other reasons, see below). The plot is taken back only after this period expires. This is why I wrote "A warning email shall be sent at least 2 days before taking back a plot." If the player resumes working on the building, the prerequisites of taking back the plot vanishes. > * The eviction/tolerance can be extended (i.e. the player can keep the plot for longer) if the player can sufficiently explain the inactivity and show that they are able to complete the project, such as > - by showing plans (and, importantly, proving their ability to carry out the plan) for the building as well as when the construction can appear to be (sufficiently) completed; > - by showing that the project is delayed due to unavoidable external factors in the 30-day period that the player have little influence over (e.g. RL issues); or > - by showing that the player has (in the given period) a different focus that is relevant to the completion or the function of a building. In precedents, I am not always taking back a plot immediately when I could (mainly because I forgot but anyways), showing that whether taking back plots or not is a discretion. To clarify, I added "Moderators have a discretion to postpone taking back a plot" in the draft. (https://wiki-twi.1f616emo.xyz/s/U) | |
| From: | 1F616EMOHelenasaurusRex |
|---|---|
| To: | 1F616EMO |
| Forwarded: | y5nw, RelaxingPlay, HelenasaurusRex, mary4, Elementalcraft, jingkaimori, Vedu_0825 |
| Date: | 2024-12-18 15:09:52 |
| Subject: | Re: Draft of Rules of Newcomers' Plots |
|
> (Sending to all helpers and moderators, sorry if I missed anyone) > > I drafted ... I think however you go about defining "unfinished", that should be documented, but erm... I'm not sure about applying the same rules for a more unfinished building to less unfinished buildings, for example, if a building is say missing a door, I don't think the matter should be dealt with in the exact same way as someone who for example only placed a block down or whatever. I think if a player looks to have put some effort in, there's a higher probability they'll be back compared to a player that hasn't. | |