Rule 10.IC in OOC(LOOC).

[misterjoper]

I will not touch OOC in IC part of the rule 10 because I completly agree with it.
However it's IC in OOC part that makes...not sure.

So in order to discuss this Thread you must read those two rules:
Rule 10."No IC in OOC or vise-versa No IC in OOC or Vice Versa - Keep IC (in character) in IC and OOC (Out-Of-Character) in OOC. Don't use (( or )) to communicate OOCly in-chat or over the radio. Doing so will result in an IMMEDIATE IC mute. Use LOOC to talk locally OOC or OOC to talk globally OOC.Never use OOC or LOOC to inform a player of something they wouldn't know or find out ICly. You MAY use LOOC to talk someone through something if they ask for help, but they should be Admin Messaging for a Mentor first."

Rule 0.1"Rules function AS INTENDED. Just because you bend the wording of a rule into a pretzel and don't break the specific RAW (Rule As Written) does not mean you didn't break the RAI (Rule As Intended). Rules can be subject to interpretation and if a staff member that is a Mod or above believes you broke a rule as it is INTENDED to function, you can expect the same consequences. The decision of the staff at the time is LAW. If you have an issue with it, appeal the ban or create a discussion topic in general."

So key Sentenses were Higlighted by me.
I.Never use OOC or LOOC to inform a player of something they wouldn't know or find out ICly.
II.Rules function AS INTENDED.

My point is:"It's fine to use IC in OOC for as Long as you don't give out IC information to someone else,who does not know that." Some Staff members disagreed with me either because they did not get My point,did not have time to understand it(or i failed to deliver it correctly) or they just blindly follow the rules,like some instruction manual.IF that's the last case they would not cross the Road if there were NO cars on the road,but the Traffic light was still RED.Because Intent of Traffic light is To keep you safe,not to punish you for crossing the road while the light is red.Well,you understand.

I will do my best to explain my point here.Follow those steps to realise my point,or prove one of my statements (AKA steps) wrong in comments.Go to the next point ONLY if you agree with the current one.
1.Rules function AS INTENDED.
Therefore Rule As Intended(RAI)>Rule as Written(RAW).Yes?
2.Never use OOC or LOOC to inform a player of something they wouldn't know or find out ICly.
The Intent of the Rule 10 is to prevent Metagaming by giving out IC information through OOC. Yes? If you Disagree or want to add please do.
3.One of the ways to prevent Metagaming is to avoid giving out IC information through OOC.That's the intent of RULE 10.So that kind of Metagaming can not be done if a Player does not have the information.So he HAS to RECIEVE the Information. Yes?
4.In order to Break the Rule 10 As Intended you have to give out IC information in OOC. Yes?
5.IT is not Possible to GIVE the Information to the Person who already HAS that information. Yes? (Come on,you can't unlearn something,i hope i won't have to exlain this to you)
6.So imagine An Event took place during a round,an Event that only 2 Players have witnessed.After that Event is over,they started to discuss that event with eachother in LOOC,having made sure that nobody else can hear/see them.Did they break rule? If you've agreed to all previous statements you answer should be NO.However:
6.A What if xeno was behind a wall?He would have heard it LOOC.Correct.If those two players were both marines they would RISK breaking the Rule.They would only break the rule if someone else reads their LOOC.Yes?
6.B If both of those players were Xenomorpths,THERE would be no other xeno nearby,because there is no xeno nearby.Yes?(they should also make sure they are no vents).This Statement is Correct yes?
6.С.There is A cloacked Predator is near those two players,he is able to read LOOC messages,he can't tell those players to stop because that will reveal himself.This case can be overlooked because:
-Majority of rounds dont' have predators.Yet?
-If there are Predators in the round,they usually get spotted and reported.Yes?
-Predators are Whitlisted and require high RP behaviour,so even Predator gets LOOC message,he won't use that to his advantage and pretend it did not happen.Yes?
Can the Predator case be Overlocked? Yes or no?
7.We can now make Conclusion:It's fine to use IC in OOC for as Long as you don't give out IC information to someone else,who does not know that.Yes or Have you not been convinced?

I am sure you will get other smarasses like me who would appeal about this case if they get banned.So This rule needs to be clarified or discussed here.

[slc97]

It blatantly says No IC in OOC in the rules. That means completely no IC in OOC. The part you highlighted is an addendum. We literally wrote "Hey, don't do this, and doing this would be even worse". So you're just as wrong as when I had to get on you about this in mchat.

Honestly, this is the one rule that is so blatantly simple I never thought I would have to clarify this to someone.

[Tylaaaaar]

There is nothing to discuss about this in my opinion the rule is very simple.

"Don't inform other players about something they didn't know through OOC/LOOC"

LOOC is generally restrained to asking simple questions that aren't needed to be Ahelped etc, "How do I digest someone?" "Can MPs break the law?"
Not to go around saying in LOOC how you've seen the entire alien cycle or you saw a predator and said it in LOOC.

Now I'm not staff so honestly you don't have to listen to a single word I say but its really easy to follow and just save the chit chat till after the round.

[emeraldmoonx]

Rules are meant to be followed. Staff follows rules to a T because we ENFORCE those rules. Players are expected to follow rules as well... You're literally contradicting yourself. You say you understand rule 0.1, yet here you are trying to bend rule 10 to your will.

Your points are irrelevant... I don't care if there's no one nearby... You're still using IC knowledge in OOC. You're breaking the rule. What you think about the rule, and even if you think you're innocent is completely pointless.

Follow the rules set by the staff, and quit bitching. It's really not a hard rule to follow... It's there for a reason, so people like YOU don't leak IC stuff in OOC.

[misterjoper]

It blatantly says No IC in OOC in the rules.

What matters:Rule As Intended or Rule As Written?You just Pointed out Rule As Written.Please tell me how you understand this Rule As Intended?

[Tylaaaaar]

What matters:Rule As Intended or Rule As Written?You just Pointed out Rule As Written.Please tell me how you understand this Rule As Intended?

you've got a really cocky vibe, and honestly if you want this to not turn out into a full blown argument you better tone it down

[Tharinoma]

" The Intent of the Rule 10 is to prevent Metagaming by giving out IC information through OOC. Yes? If you Disagree or want to add please do."
No, the intent of the rule is to "Keep IC (in character) in IC and OOC (Out-Of-Character) in OOC". It's rather simple.

[misterjoper]

" The Intent of the Rule 10 is to prevent Metagaming by giving out IC information through OOC. Yes? If you Disagree or want to add please do."
No, the intent of the rule is to "Keep IC (in character) in IC and OOC (Out-Of-Character) in OOC". It's rather simple.

And Why would you punish People for IC in OOC?If your answer is to prevent givivng out information,player wouldn't know or find out ICly.Then that answer proves my point.Is there Any other reason for punishing People for IC in OOC?

[emeraldmoonx]

And Why would you punish People for IC in OOC?If your answer is to prevent givivng out information,player wouldn't know or find out ICly.Then that answer proves my point.Is there Any other reason for punishing People for IC in OOC?

We DON'T need another reason. It's a simple rule made for a simple reason. You're looking too deep into it and looking for more shit. If you use IC knowledge in OOC, then that's a rule break. I'm failing to see how hard is it to understand this rule? It's the simplest rule we have.

[misterjoper]

We DON'T need another reason. It's a simple rule made for a simple reason. You're looking too deep into it and looking for more shit.

So you are implying that you punish people for no reason?Can you name any other reason other than giving out IC information in OOC?
(look I am not trying to accuse you of that,i just want you to realsie my point).Because I looked into that TOO deep i found the logical falacy in it.Misunderstanding of that rule leads to unjustified bans.

[Jay Burns]

Locking this because this is dumb and gonna get out of hand. Also rule as intended lads.

[Feweh]

Dont be stupid in the future.