Modification of Rules.

Redstoner → Other → Modification of Rules.

Due to recent development in situations and confrontations concerning some Rules, there has been a slight yet ==important== change to Rule 16 and Rule 17.

As we all know, creating, sharing or using potions capable of killing someone (while in creative), have been illegal and a Bannable offense. This rule change will make it illegal to have said item(s) in your possession; Whether that location be your hotbar, inventory, chests, enderchests, etc.

Please note the word possess. Those of you that do not know the definition, I have been kind enough to supply the answer for your convenience.

Here are the new and improved Rules:

(16). Do not create, share, ==possess==, or use potions that can kill players (in creative) or can cause players to crash. Unreasonably high speed potions are also banned. (17). Do not create, share, ==possess==, or use items that have unreasonably high Knockback or Punch enchants (vanilla levels only), as it can send people into unloaded chunks).

If you have any, dispose of it immediately.

If you are aware of an infringement or speculate a violation of these Rules. Please report to staff by using the command /report while in-game.

If only staff members of servers didn’t time the modification of rules so that their mistakes were justified…

I do not believe that hacker is doing anything solely for personal self defense by creating a necessary update to rules 16 & 17. Staff has decided that after recent events it is best for the server’s welfare and peace to make potions with the listed abilities 100% illegal. It was a rule that was evidently not clearly enough defined, and consequently created an argument that should not have been necessary. Therefore I believe that the given updates for these rules are totally justified. @zombachu

@zombachu I can clearly see how you have come to that conclusion. The facts of the matter is though, it was practically understood that possessing of such items was illegal before that indecent; Although, not technically illegal at the time due to the original poster of the rule not thinking the definition/wording through. The change is not to “justify” someones mistake, but to ratify, make clear, and remove all future arguments.

@L0rdDrag0 I’m not saying it was his sole reason for changing the rules, but I am saying the timing and reaction was awfully convenient due to him receiving backlash on Nyx’s ban. If the rule was so vitally important to the server’s wellbeing, why wasn’t it changed earlier (after the multiple similar cases that didn’t involve hacker), or after the Nyx incident happened, learning from that incident?

Instead, the rules were changed WHILE the appeal process was happening, after Hacker already dished out the ban and was receiving backlash.

@HackerAttacker See my response to Drago above

Though Hacker did make mistakes during the whole ordeal I don’t think that it is fair to continue to create disputes over a problem that these rule changes were created to resolve. Both sides made mistakes through the issue, and they will both admit this. The updates to the rules are being put in place to avoid more arguments, not to justify one that is more or less resolved. I will no longer contribute to this topic, as I hope the rest of the people involved will also choose to do.

@L0rdDrag0 I’m not denying that the rule changes will undoubtedly prevent more such incidents in the future. Instead, I’m pointing out the timing of the rule change and the potential motivation behind it which affected the past.

@HackerAttacker @L0rdDrag0 … I’ll just say it should’ve been fine to trust a trusted player with that.