I am fairly new to the game, but I am pretty certain that using Staff Tools to solve a situation between two factions is outside the intended scope of how Torn is played. This entire game is centered around various dubious acts, wars, drugs, slutting for money and spending far too much time in the gym.
What Bogie should have done is simply offer advice as staff: "You guys are pushing back against R*'s extortion? Woooweeee, good luck, have fun."
This was not a scam. Sure, if Swat was given the territory to simply hold, and told to comply with ANY extortion attempt, then that should have been explicitly stated when the racket was handed to him/her/them/they. If it was not stated, the gains were fair game and pushing back is part of the game!
R* should have stuck to their side of the threat and attempted to take the racket from Flux.
Either way, it seems like a really simple situation that people are overcomplicating for no good reason.
I love some of the entries from the guys where they mock the minimal clothing we see when this comp rolls around....
My faction fellow has a point though. At what point do we judge something on the damage it could potentially cause? My RL occupation sees me assigning age ratings, which we base on the moral implications of the content, the harm it may cause and the likelihood of impact internalization.
Sure, Ched et al have their own rules, and as far as a free and progressive society is concerned they are fine, but there is a need for a clearer line to maintain the integrity of Torn as 'wholesome' and 'mature' fun.
You do realise that you have no actual case, right? You can drop the pretentious "legal eagle" stance, you are not the only person that is either well-versed in law or functions in a legal capacity in the real world (which torn is not part of).
This is a game and you are not an authority in any shape or form. If a committee member is prohibited from scamming, then players should know not to even attempt ANY move that may involve the committee member in anything that may result in a prohibited act.
Bogie flexed Staff Tools in a situation that already had a player-driven outcome: FLUX being S7'd for not complying with the extortionist's demands. This satisfies Torn's position as a Crime MMO.
There was no scam, you are reaching and quite frankly it is alarming that you cannot see that BOTH arguments have merit just as much as both parties are liable for the ridiculous amount of drama that has ensued.
I was just about to ask this. If Staff dont want committee members to play the game as it is supposed to be played, and to only facilitate a specific role, then they shouldn't be allowed to be in a faction... or should be in a committee faction.
You do realise that you have no actual case, right? You can drop the pretentious "legal eagle" stance, you are not the only person that is either well-versed in law or functions in a legal capacity in the real world (which torn is not part of).
This is a game and you are not an authority in any shape or form. If a committee member is prohibited from scamming, then players should know not to even attempt ANY move that may involve the committee member in anything that may result in a prohibited act.
Bogie flexed Staff Tools in a situation that already had a player-driven outcome: FLUX being S7'd for not complying with the extortionist's demands. This satisfies Torn's position as a Crime MMO.
There was no scam, you are reaching and quite frankly it is alarming that you cannot see that BOTH arguments have merit just as much as both parties are liable for the ridiculous amount of drama that has ensued.
Only if the game clearly states it's position in terms of actual law, which jurisdiction it falls under and what would constitute a case of Cyber Bullying, and if that case has merit as an ex parte application against another individual.
You make good points, but, let's step back a little further and consider that perhaps a committee member should not have been extorted in the first place. If they [committee member] may not scam, extort or otherwise engage in illegal acts by explicit rules, then they should be immune to extortion attempts against them.
This whole issue reads as: a faction was threatened under the premise of clear extortion. The head of the faction operated in his faction role and agreed to be extorted. A short while later he changed his mind, while still assuming the role of faction leader.
Nothing more is needed, as both parties are at fault. R* for extorting a Committee member and Swat for not operating in his primary role as Committee member.
I still dont get how some see this as a scam! If it wasnt extortion and the racket was given under specific rules then sure, Swat obtained the racket for personal gain, screw the deal.
But this isnt that situation.
FLUX were told that if they dont pay up they will be S7'd (Extortion with an active threat). Clear as daylight extortion!
If a mobster tells a shop owner to pay for protection, "or else" (extortion) then the shop owner might decide they will pay to avoid damage, OR, they think "screw you Al, taste my shotgun!". You do NOT have to comply with extortion, even after you initially do (normally out of fear). FLUX grew nuts and waves them in R*'s face; R* should have held up their end of the threat.
This is a good idea. Hopefully Bogie or Ched are reading this. Committee members playing the game should be allowed the same opportunities as the rest of us, within the scope of the game. Extortion is within the scope, and thus the refusal to comply is equally in the scope of the game.
![[image: i.imgflip.com]](https://i.imgflip.com/4eahqu.jpg){kind=link}