[Breakaway~totheweird]

Some things need to be addressed:

1) The first person to metagame was Romek by dueling in the arena, where he banned from doing so, choosing a time where no guards were present and the NPC guards could not be controlled by GMs since they were offline. I would like to see an official answer on how Romek's player will be addressed for his metagaming.

- I'd like to say that Romek has dueled in the arena after this stipulation was implemented. A guard was even present at that time, including the golden guard, and they were simply asked to step outside of the arena. If this were as serious of a matter as to execute someone, then that should be the point to apprehend him. It only installs the notion that doing so again wouldn't have adverse consequences. No one is saying that his IC reactions weren't wrong. However, to my knowledge, no sort of mentality occurred on an OOC level.

2) The logs that were shared of The Person In Question's (I will refer to them as TPIQ) admission only showed that they 'wanted Romek dead,' there is no proof or admission that this desire affected their actions.

- TPIQ was asked about the situation at hand. It's truly up for interpretation, but honestly? This looks like admittance to metagaming. Also, unlike the many claims of Romek metagaming, there's an inkling of tangible proof. Where can we gleen from the notion of him attempting to metagame, or his reasoning?

3) The fact that private logs between TPIQ and the other party were shared so publicly is appalling. The amount of backlash that person received is one of the worst parts of this situation and it undermines the attempts of the appeal.

- There have been several, upon several attempts to discreetly handle matters such as these to no avail. This is the tipping point.

4) There is many blatant lies circulating that TPIQ also performed the arrest of Romek also undermines the petitions effort.

- TPIQ wasn't the one who arrested Romek. Rowen was the one who arrested Romek, and the TPIQ's character was conveniently "radio'd in" for some kind assistance. Honestly, they were in, screamed about needing eye witness accounts, and once they received a few, left.

I'm not against having discussions regarding admins handle of the situation. I'm a personal advocate of 100% transparency under any and all circumstances but this petition doesn't address this.

- I'll get back to you on that.

Ultimately, I won't tell anyone to not sign the petition if they do wish for these changes. Everyone's welcome to voice themselves. However, please... please don't do this: http://puu.sh/qDGif/819d5d028b.png

- And that's obviously someone who was misinformed.

I've had my fair share of GMs handling issues poorly.

The most infamous example is when I ran an event for my group. Guards were clearly implied to be there. A person belonging to CE ran in, tacked a flyer on the wall, and left in one post without giving anyone else a chance to respond. That is godmodding. However, after this was brought to an admin's attention, this was the response.

https://gyazo.com/6a2363e7ac9cba163b4a04b923cef54d
https://i.gyazo.com/thumb/1200/_1302a4c3...83-png.jpg
https://gyazo.com/214d5274a4338f10eba58e68103a3405