[Cerrik]

1. Choosy in which regard? That this one scenario was point out? If so, then there's been several, other times that some instances of metagaming and godmodding have happened, and the involved parties wanted to "avoid" conflict. Be it something akin to this, or being banned/ ignored once stating their cause. Once again, I'm saying that Romek should be face the consequences of metagaming. Simply because he potentially forgot about the NPC guards doesn't mean he knowingly metagamed, much like how you say that those logs aren't concrete evidence of TPIQ metagaming.

2. To quote myself in a different line of discussion: "TPIQ logging into her character, and initiating combat with Romek with the OOC knowledge of his next offense leading to his death – matter has been ignored by the Gms. According to several roleplaying sites, the actions taken here to make certain a particular character dies (OOCly) is considered as metagaming. There really isn't any other way to describe it. When someone attaches OOC feelings, thoughts, knowledge, and motivations to IC situations, they have ignored the clear-cut line between OOC and IC. Someone managing to circumvent this by taking advantage of their position within the community should not be tolerated." In the first round of screenshots, they were seen speaking about how the person they're doing this for had an OOC attachment for a particular character, and because they have feelings for that player, that prompted this series of events. It didn't appear to have anything to do with what IC interactions those two characters have had (my own character was idling around Romek's the majority of the time).

3. If someone has bullied, harassed, tortured, or abused TPIQ, then they've entirely missed the point of any of this, which is: cracking down on metagaming (with a specific example),cracking down on godmodding (with a specific example), and looking into what emotional ties admins may or may not have with particular players.

4. I probably won't create a new petition due to how many people can't take this seriously (even by the GMs. Looking at the person who said that the people legitimately concerned with SL2's status a bunch of 'babies'), and fail to discuss things in a proper manner aside from me, you, and some others.

I'm gonna iterate something I may not have addressed that is my stance: I'm also entirely against all forms of metagaming/godmodding/crossing IC and OOC and if you ask anyone who's known me for more than a month, I make that annoyingly clear. The only reason I refuse to sign the petition is due to the biases that are present that I will address in a moment.

1) Choosy in the regard to say that Romek wasn't 'entirely metagaming' or to quote you from earlier: "I don't think it should be counted as entirely metagaming." I am of the stance that, yes, it should be considered so because intent was not necessary to tell if he was godmodding. (... There I go. I switch those terms a lot. I should address that I put those two in the same field, and if this has caused confusion, that's entirely my fault! I'll make sure to use godmodding as my term.) When Romek dueled in an area where NPC guards could feasibly stop him but he continued anyway, that's godmodding. In your defense, you never said he shouldn't be punished for it. My argumentative point is that this should be the forefront of the issue and more directly addressed than TBIQ's possible metagaming.

(Edit: Missed an apostrophe, added it in.)

2) By the logic presented by your quote, you're saying that TBIQ is disallowed from RPing in any scenario that could lead to Romek's death since she has OOC knowledge of what would happen if he was arrested. The key factor is having that OOC knowledge 'and' acting upon it. You need both of those for it to actually be considered metagaming. We have proof that TBIQ knew what his next arrest led to but the logs are not solid proof that that is why she acted upon them. To quote Kunai (... I can't believe I'm quoting Kunai. jk ily