Rewriting of Rule #3 for Clarification

[Fluz43]

(I know, bla bla bla no position to talk about this, the normal SJW shit. Well guess what, it's called a mistake and scar on my and the server's history and I can only learn from my mistakes. I can't do anything now about the past less I make a liar by trying to cover up the truth. Spare me your attempts to justify or disqualify any arguments)

As rule #3 stands, it leaves a general impression of "don't invade on other people's privacy." Yes, I understand the meaning of the rule. But, anyone who does know me probably knows me as "the guy who complains about rule 3," and I complain not because of its implementation, but what I see to be poor wording and possible misinterpretation of the rule by people whose age exceeds their IQ score. You can probably tell that I play the devil's advocate in all situations, beyond what just goes on in this server. And in doing so, I believe that rule 3 should be specified for anyone who wants to read what is considered to be "bad" for situations when one might unknowingly be doing something that risks other's privacy.

Given that for the past almost two months I had been reading a ton of legal lawyer lingo, I believe to have come to a decent way to properly word what I think the rule should consist of with information to include and with direction from Yukar himself. I understand that this is all subject to the special conditions in each unique case, but I find closure now knowing that after 10 months I can say I have rationalized the rule, posted in full below:

Rule 3:
“PLAYER PRIVACY RULE”
PROPOSED 26 JANUARY 2016, ENACTED FEBRUARY 2016; AMENDED 30 OCTOBER 2016:

3. Players may be banned if they are recognized by official administration to be in violation of the—

A) EXTERNAL PRIVACY PROVISION: Information and contact, known to be pertinent to the real identity of participants within this server, simpvp.net, or any previous, current, and future online address used to gain access to such server, shall not, other than when given explicit and recorded exemption of such participant in question, be shared, or in the case of establishing unauthorized contact, be made, among any other participants of this server, any previous, current, and future online addresses used to gain access to such server, or anyone else believed to possess the means to endanger the security or feeling of privacy of such individual, by any and all possible medians of communication.

B) INTERNAL PRIVACY PROVISION: Information and contact, known to be pertinent to the real identity of participants within this server, simpvp.net, or any previous, current, and future online address used to gain access to such server, despite previous mentioning by such participant in question, that, although recorded or published, but is determined by ruling administration of this server and all related internet addresses to contain the essential elements necessary to damage such player’s sense of privacy, security, or otherwise reputation, shall not be shared, or in the case of establishing unauthorized contact, shall not be made, other than when given explicit and recorded exemption of such participant in question, among any other participants of this server, any previous, current, and future online addresses used to gain access to such server, or anyone else believed to possess the means to endanger the security of feeling of privacy of such individual.



SIMPLIFIED:

#3 Contact with or sharing private information about any player with ANYONE without permission, or if what is said may endanger their well-being, is prohibited on this server. Skype, texting, etc., may not used to share personal information, either.

[DakkaDok]

Yeah, we could replace the rule by a giant block of text that 90% of players would barely be able to understand. Or we could trust players not to be total idiots, and admins to apply warnings and bans as needed.
In my opinion, the rule as it stands is perfectly sufficient.

[Fluz43]

Since the simplified section on the bottom of the rule was obviously not going to be put in the menu and be explained on the webpage.

[DakkaDok]

That simplified version is pretty much the same as what we already have though.

[Yukar9]

Thinking about adding all the legalese, I just don't see what good it will do. The vast majority (everybody) won't read it thoroughly and therefore won't gain any understanding from it.

Knowing people who try to argue their way out of rule #2, I fear some people will just try to argue the fine print of the rule instead of the spirit. Nothing shuts down a troll faster than "admin decision is final." For something like a Minecraft server it makes more sense IMO to run it like a dictatorship, as (in my biased opinion) admins tend to make fairly good decisions.

So I think it makes more sense to have the short versions of the rules be the canonical ones, and then perhaps have longer paragraphs explaining the meaning and reason for the rules, but then it makes more sense for the long version to be in plain English than in legalese.

[DakkaDok]

Yeah, that's pretty much what i meant but didn't find the right words for.

[Fluz43]

Meh okay

[LoneSoldier55]

legalities like this clusterfuck are dumb when you're actively trying to get rid of someone who's a problem so usually your rule #1 is admins make up rules whenever they want to which solves the problem