[Poll] Large Scale Null - Rewrite of IC_Event Post

[Kinaed]

Dear Players,

As you know, TI's policy is that nulls can only be enacted by the unanimous agreement of players involved in RP. Historically, this has meant that once RP reaches a certain critical mass, staff usually won't null it. However, anyone reading the forums will see that there appears to be wide-scale pbase support to doing exactly that in the case of the announcement of Shaylei de Roldan's loss of nobility. Unfortunately, it hard to tell how many players actually support it, or if it's only a handful of people who cared to comment on the forums who feel that way. We're also not entirely sure how this affects the RP people have had around the topic.

Therefore, we'd like to poll the support of the pbase at large for this null action to facilitate our decision-making on the topic.

NOTE: It is not our intention set a precedent to poll null requests. This situation is unique in many ways and we feel the information is valuable to our decision-making in this particular, unique instance. Polling for nulls on large-scale RP is at staff discretion.

[Geras]

Does this really even require a null? It'd just be editing an existing post.

[Geras]

Assuming the removal stands. It'd just be changing the story as to why. Charali raiders, crop failures, or undisclosed reasons...

[SilverMoon]

I really don't have enough information to vote on this. I don't know why it would have to be nulled, or why it shouldn't be. Which is why I'm abstaining from voting either way.

[Kinaed]

Changing something that happened in RP is the actual definition of a null.

[Misstery]

Just a question of clarification? Is this to null the decision to remove title or to change the IC_Event post so the reasons for removal are more vague, etc.? (The later seems to be what the forum was about).

[Kinaed]

No, the title removal was a matter of policy. This is just to let the PC author of the IC Event post to null the contents of the first post and resubmit a new post that is "kinder" to the PC in question. I haven't read the new suggested post, but it would require a deeper null to change the underlying circumstances that prompted that IC_Event post, which I'll consider depending on how the vote goes.

[Geras]

I really don't have enough information to vote on this. I don't know why it would have to be nulled, or why it shouldn't be. Which is why I'm abstaining from voting either way.

This thread - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1399

And IC note 20. It's a poll on whether or not to null IC board note 20 and to replace it with one with fewer/less harsh RP implications for the character involved. Still "you're no longer a noble" but less "you're no longer a noble because you're incompetent." I think.

[Voxumo]

I voted No, staff should not null it. My reasons for this is
I personally have already had rp with at least two other people surrounding the original reasoning. And not just one line rp, but several hours worth of rp. And the RP wasn't just about "Oh she was removed" it was about the reason for the removal. As such just changing the reason would null any rp that was about the reason, not the outcome.
There was a rumor posted surrounding the original reasons stated, and then the rumor was quickly removed on player side, meaning there was rp that happened with a troubadour to see the rumor removed.

I can not imagine this is the only instance of RP taking place surrounding the original event post, especially with the amount of time the original Event Post stood. This is almost a week after it was posted. If the null had taken place within 48 hours, I likely would not be so quick to say "No" but the amount of time is a large factor in my choice.

[Annalesa]

I vote yes.

It's not about being "kinder" per se and much more about what is reasonable and better for the role play environment overall because the reasoning as it stands is cut and dry, and it doesn't really allow for any debate or planning or give us anywhere to go other than "Shaylei bad", and that's just not very fun RP.

My -only- quibble is with the phrase "due to lack of oversight", because it more or less directly states that Shaylei was a layabout good for nothing that sat on her butt eating bonbons all day. It is simply unreasonable for somebody to suffer the severe IC consequences that are going to come along with that for having OOC issues. That's sort of like me disappearing on Tobius due to OOC issues enough to get him deguilded and coming back to find that the IC reason for him being deguilded is him being fired from the Reeves with a stated public reason of extreme insubordination because he failed to show up to a battle with a demon where the Reeves were backing the knights.

The IC consequence of her OOC absense is her losing the noble slot. That's policy, and whether I like it or not, that's what it is and I think it's severe enough; there is nothing wrong with there being legitimate and reasonable IC consequences stemming from that, but there should be some way to find a story or a way out that doesn't have the IC effect of rendering the character a social pariah. And, yes, if she loses her nobility because she sat on her duff while trying to establish a colony in such a harsh environment, one would reasonably expect the character to become a social pariah. ICly, I don't see that the story as stands is really all that different than some noble heir or another doing something heinous and then having to take up the "mal" patroynym.

The shame of losing the title -period- is bad enough, let alone because of negligence.

I am NOT saying that there shouldn't be some sort of consequences and we just shrug our shoulders and let it go ICly, but I think that there needs to be a balance between "meh" and "holy crap this character that ICly has run several successful businesses, been married to two Earl Marshalls, was Prime Medicus for 10 IC years or so, and is on the board of a major trading colony suddenly turned into a lazy good for nothing and let a whole March fail because she just couldn't be bothered to do anything".

My bottom line: she's suffering the IC consequences of an OOC absence in losing her nobility. Allowing the potentially severe IC consequences of the reasons stated to stand when her ONLY "crime" was being sick and having issues mentally is just plain not cool, not reasonable, and quite frankly assigns the player a whole new story and set of lousy social circumstances to deal with without her consent, without her knowledge, and all of it happening because she got sick.

There are a lot of people here who've been sick or have had various other issues and have asked for some patience and some empathy and a bit of a break, me among them. I feel like it's pretty reasonable that we extend that.

As for the "nulling of RP" aspect, you don't even have to "null" it. Just leave the post as is and write another, updated, board post stating that further information has yielded that she wasn't just sitting on her duff, but that she was captured or that the person you thought was her was actually some imposter mage or any other of a thousand reasons and that initial reports were from scared villagers fleeing for their lives and quite reasonably thinking that their Marquessa had abadnoned them in their ignorance, but that military insiders have come home with evidence to a different effect.