The End of POK's?

Quick find code: 237-238-814-65869763

of 6
Nov Member 2017


Posts: 1,348Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
This happened to Falador (If I remember correctly.) once. It was handed off to an NPC king, but then other people ended up using it. Not saying this won't work, just being the Devil's advocate. I'm never on here. Ignore me.

(I don't care either way. Live and let live.)

14-Jan-2017 07:03:03

Oct Gold Premier Club Member 2012


Posts: 5,640Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
And now legitimate discussion is being thrown out the window, and the harassment has begun. A good try, Blox, but this likely won't happen large-scale, and your thread's about to completely dissolve in to bickering.

Also, sad that I didn't get a personal reply whereas most others did.
The True Asgarnia -
Maxed 10/15/2018

Want to Role-Play? Click Here!

14-Jan-2017 07:04:21

fmod Member


Forum Moderator Posts: 59,894Emerald Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Removed a few off topic comments. Do remember y'all that if you're quoting someone just to say there is no point dignifying it with a response. There is no point posting to begin with. ~Tranq~
Reaping another soul from the ambient mortality
Need Forum Help (click me)

14-Jan-2017 10:32:27



Posts: 1,191Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Dansplainer said:
Do not lump my Kandarin in as a supporter of Npc rule, simply because a single administrator supports it. The administration of Kandarin, including myself, as far as I know, maintains the POK as is, and will until and after I can return to leadership.

I guess I'll respond to this one by painting out for you to see the flaws in what you said last night, piece by piece.

You're a holder of a pok who's inactive and knows it, and your administrators took over in your absence. People want to claim your POK, as nothing is going on in it, but you refuse and cling to the land you hold, saying you'll provide RP when you get back. The community backs this on
the grounds of how the people claiming it have a poor reputation.

When the community comes together and many begin to agree to give up their land, you go on to continue to refuse to give up your POK. To paraphrase, all you said was how one administrator doesn't speak for yourself and one other person; as well as how you will not give up your land.

You did not provide reasoning in what you said, and you claimed jurisdiction over the POK despite not having had an active role in it for well over a month now.

This, to me, looks like the image of the stereotypical POK owner we used to joke about, on claiming land, not doing anything with it but then refusing to give it up. I wish this wasn't what it looked like, but it certainly doesn't look any better when you don't elaborate.

I await a real explanation of why you won't give it up soon.
Kingdom of Hynafiaid
"Faith without works is dead."
W41 Squad

14-Jan-2017 15:46:21



Posts: 784Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I'll attempt to answer your question, Blox, in daniel's stead, seeing as he is still recovering from a frightening medical issue and without internet connection (which is to soon end as far as I am aware.) His response yesterday was a rare occassion. I should warn you, however, that I am an advocate of Daniel, and my opinion is not presented within this post.

The criticizing of his short response is unfounded; the capability of an articulate reply is not necessarily within his arsenal right now do to the aforementioned reasons. If people truly have attempted to contact The Sunrise Kingdom about taking over, then they have not contacted the appropriate personnel. No whispers have met Eli or myself, and seeing as we are the current leadership, saying someone tried to claim it is hearsay. Unless, of course, you are referring to the Vekon, who we have already disowned for reasons mentioned in my previous post.

As for the activity levels, I shall clear the air once and only once. There has been active roleplays. I will admit, it is not as much as I'd like, but seeing as Eli was on holiday and I have been covering shifts at the nursing home I work at, ontop of my own, things have gotten a bit foggy. Now that my workplace is appropriately staffed, it is my full intention to begin hosting regular roleplay that will involve the entire kingdom, from the peasant roleplay to the royalty.

I cannot comment on Daniel's overall reasoning against NPC rule, but I can attempt to decipher, seeing as I have known him for over six years. Daniel is very traditional and loves the push and pull of the throne room's roleplay. Removing POKs would remove a very historical part of w42 roleplay, almost murdering the essence of it. I am sure if there was a way to keep this aspect in our community with NPC rule, Daniel would be more open to the idea.

Shanks babe!

Sidenote, I'm actually partial to each sides of the argument and would love to read some thrilling debates.
“I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.”
J.R.R. Tolkien

14-Jan-2017 17:16:14

Sep Member 2007


Posts: 2,857Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I am annoyed because you have placed Dandarin in a list supporting one side of this discussion, when only one administrator, and one side of a temprorary co-regency system, had spoken on this. I am asking you to wait until the administration of Dandarin has made a deliberation on this discussion, before deciding to post that we support this proposal.

As for my personal view on this, Blox, I know that you have the best interest of the community in mind in this presentation, but I do not believe you are putting effort in the right place to solve the issues that we have.

While it is true that PoKs are a platform which we are able to project our spite for each other, and create establishments which are most often unfriendly and, thus, undesirable, they are also a platform which allow us to exert limitless creativity, so by abolition, you are forcing one perspective of an immense spectrum of ideas and beliefs.

Take the US Prohibition, of alcohol, as an example:
Legislation made under a point, of many, that alcohol causes domestic issues. Though, while that is not to say that is untrue, alcohol is merely a platform which makes people capable of harmful, and otherwise dangerous, activities to themselves and to others due to irresponsible use. So a similarity can be drawn to the existence of PoKs, that is that responsible use leads to a more enjoyable experience for you, and for those around you.

Regardless of whether or not every PoK ended today, those in our community who have created establishments to harass and spite others, thus leaving a bitter taste to those sampling the experience, will still find new ways to harm others, because the problem is not that we use PoKs, but how we use them.

The problem is that people are not dissuaded by the existence of PoKs, they're dissuaded by the existence of disrespect, and as a consequence, the irresponsible use of them.

Hi, I'm Dan.

14-Jan-2017 17:36:46 - Last edited on 14-Jan-2017 17:39:00 by Dansplainer

Quick find code: 237-238-814-65869763Back to Top