probably most people would - when you´re told you will be shot, then at least you burn it before you get shot, especially when its the only thing left you could do.
but in fact this is not a simple yes/no, good/bad, black/white situation, therefore i think the consequences shouldnt just be picked out of canonization or death penalty, there´s lots of space between those 2 choices.
though i know also in real life society it is more popular these days to reduce everything to black/white categories, its easier to handle and not so much you have to think of - still i hope inside our small community we could do a little better than that...
He was given two choices, one that was the most neutral option, and one that was really the only punishment that would fit the situation. He was given over 3 hours to make a decision, and his attitude the whole time was dismissive and he was unwilling to compromise. He also then chose to delete the guild, which he should have known would have been punished the way it was.
I keep hear people saying "This wouldn't have happened on EU/This was common on EU". Reality check for everyone:
this is not EU. While I do not normally involve myself in personal disputes because I have no preference for any player, I will involve myself if it involves more than a few people, is getting out of hand, or if it deals with an actual major issue. This particular dispute met all three of those criteria, as it affected a whole guild and there is no way that this would not grow to be a larger issue. It also deals with a feature that is easily abused, but had not been abused here till this point. I also have to point out it is not a players job to punish someone else for what they have perceived is wrong; in the reasons that Lang uses to try to justify his actions only the scam accusations have any merit, and even then it should have been brought up to me.
In regards to the scam accusations, I was never made aware of Kazunokun's trade, and I stepped in to mediate when I learned of it. Kazunokun decided to not pursue the situation even though that option is still available to him. As far as Langs trade goes, I may have been told about it once in passing in game, and it basically was him asking me to look up a log revolving around "80" for the deal between him and Saint... The issue with this is that it is not easy to find such things, and it would still lack context so I would have told him to get more evidence, or to give Saint time where they could come to an agreement. If I was told of the situation, I had no further follow up and as such I would not know of the situation. The sad reality is if I do not have evidence to support that a scam is going on I cannot mediate the trade or enforce the trade. This is also made more difficult due to the trades having to do with real money, and that is something that we cannot support here, nor is it something I can enforce. Luckily I am able to mediate the situation with Lang and Saint now as I was given some evidence, and Saint will have to complete the trade or he will be banned.
Ironically, for everyone who seems to think I take preference for Saint... I literally cannot stand dealing with Saint, and he is well aware of it. However he is also well aware that my personal feelings or preferences for people do not have any weight in support or when I am involved in mediation or anything else. I am literally the kind of person who will take the side of someone elses if the person I am dating is in the wrong, which is why I have never allowed anyone I date to play on our server. In this specific situation Lang was in the wrong; if he was unhappy with the way the guild was run, he should have left rather than punish every person in the guild; he could have also taken the guild members who were unsatisfied and it would have equally hurt Saint as to losing the guild. If he was upset about the status of the trade him and Saint had, he should come to me and given me evidence and I would have stepped in as I have now.
Lang may have a chance to be unbanned, but I am stuck in a position where no matter what decision I make people are unhappy. If Lang was not banned, Systematic members would not have been happy with how things were handled. If he is banned his friends will claim I am taking Saints side and protecting him. People will cry that it was not a rule, but that is only because it did not happen on this server before as people generally avoid drama here. Now that it has happened, it has become a rule and I will be heavy handed about it as there is no place for it on this network.
This thread is being locked as it is just going to be people supporting one side or another, and neither side really has any real involvement other than what they feel is right or wrong. The situation is being handled, and if that results in Lang being unbanned then that is fine, but people trying to involve themselves are likely to have the opposite effect.