The End of POK's?
Quick find code: 237-238-814-65869763
Also, sad that I didn't get a personal reply whereas most others did. The True Asgarnia -
Want to Role-Play? Click Here!
Appologise to one another and pick up the mature civil discussion you guys had before Daniel's post somehow triggered you all to be kids again. Quickly learn how to Roleplay on RuneScape!
Reaping another soul from the ambient mortality
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.
As little respect as I hold for you currently, I agree wholeheartedly with your post. "Good maps make good plans."
14-Jan-2017 17:10:24 - Last edited on 14-Jan-2017 17:10:38 by John McAfee
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.
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.”
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.
(Woo! Phone WiFi hotspot! I AM USING UP MY PRECIOUS DATA FOR YOU JERKS) Hi, I'm Dan.
14-Jan-2017 17:36:46 - Last edited on 14-Jan-2017 17:39:00 by Dansplainer