Rule Suggestion Remove Invisible Rules.

Rule suggestions will be reviewed by Superadmins, this may take longer than standard content suggestions.
J4ckP0T

J4ckP0T

Member
Aug 10, 2026
15
2
11
What does this suggestion change/add/remove: Removing Invisible Rules

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?: Idk, search feature dosent really for me. Its really hard to use btw

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2): A Better understanding of the rules. More transparency with server & player community.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion: More rules, meaning someone will have to type it into the rules and that process could be long and tiring.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted: I'd like to start out by saying this post is heavily inspired by Ganch's Suggestion, where he talks about the invisible rule on TG (which i didnt know about and i play tg) And i think just in general it would be good for the server to have invisible rules made visible, seeing as people like transparency, and alot of people are on Ganch's Suggestion typing -support, because of the fact, that they want it removed. ( i also did it ) So this post is solely for those people who actually want the invisible rules removed/added to the real rule list, so they're easier to follow, and we dont get punished for something we didnt know

THIS SCREENSHOT IS FROM GANCH

1787139476156.png
 
Upvote 25 Downvote
Disabling repair tool functionality in dimensions and preventing TG from using powers in his cell are both things that can be coded into the game. They seem straightforward but I have no way of knowing as I have no coding experience.

I believe that if it can be solved through coding then it should be. In the meantime the ruling should be public.

-

The big issue with “no invisible rules” however is that it makes sense that you can’t use your repair tool in a dimension, it’s just overlooked mechanically and there are so many things that fit the bill of “You wouldn’t normally be able to do this” that it’s going to end up with massive rule page bloat if every time a ruling was made it was listed there. Some people are ok with playing this game as in-depth as D&D but it generally turns new players away.
 
Harold Hawks said:
Disabling repair tool functionality in dimensions and preventing TG from using powers in his cell are both things that can be coded into the game. They seem straightforward but I have no way of knowing as I have no coding experience.

I believe that if it can be solved through coding then it should be. In the meantime the ruling should be public.

-

The big issue with “no invisible rules” however is that it makes sense that you can’t use your repair tool in a dimension, it’s just overlooked mechanically and there are so many things that fit the bill of “You wouldn’t normally be able to do this” that it’s going to end up with massive rule page bloat if every time a ruling was made it was listed there. Some people are ok with playing this game as in-depth as D&D but it generally turns new players away.
Click to expand...
Icl I'm pretty sure that's what merrick just added1787178369945.png
 
Harold Hawks said:
The big issue with “no invisible rules” however is that it makes sense that you can’t use your repair tool in a dimension, it’s just overlooked mechanically and there are so many things that fit the bill of “You wouldn’t normally be able to do this” that it’s going to end up with massive rule page bloat if every time a ruling was made it was listed there. Some people are ok with playing this game as in-depth as D&D but it generally turns new players away.
Click to expand...
I agree 1000%. My only concern is how these rulings are enforced. Using the Techie dimension as a example, the rules say its ok the gensec telling you to repair the door says its ok, and the 22415 that put you in says it ok. Then all of a sudden your pulled into a staff sit and warned for FRP I feel like that would equally turn away new players. Which is why for each of these major rulings like these people should get verbals first before they get a warn.
 
Cill said:
Oh also these "Invisible rulings" are not some special rules that staff only see. They are clarifications on existing rules such as FailRP, FearRP, RDM, etc and what is and isn't allowed either because it's frequently asked or done for balancing reasons i.e
"Can ERT be FearRP'd?" - "No" [FAQ]
"Do you get FearRP'd when a turret from an AVL is pointed at you?" - "No" [Balancing/FAQ]
Click to expand...
Dawg that is NAWT what we are talking about. We realize that invisible rulings aren't something only staff can see. (Although half the time you don't know because staff don't publicly TALK about it.) The problem is how quickly you get warned for breaking said invisible rules.
 
When I wrote my first set of official rules for a game I owned, I tried to cover every exhaustive offense that there could be. My rules page looked like a EULA and we went through great pains to keep it (and the community) updated of changes. People still broke rules and when they were pointed out, they'd shrug and say that they didn't know it was against the rules or more frustratingly yet, use the fact that the rules were so specific to argue & rules lawyer with my mod team, which lead to massive burnout over time.

In the end, we ended up with three primary rules: Follow the platform's TOS, interact positively with others / avoid conflict & follow all staff instructions. Any possible offense someone could do fell under those three categories in some way, and my staff were instructed to issue a verbal warning for anything that could not be reasonably extrapolated from those three simple rules. It did empower my staff a ridiculous amount, as they could effectively make up rules on the spot to fit the situation if they felt like what was happening was wrong, but I trusted in my staff's supervisors to provide oversight and corrections where necessary.

A similiar situation exists here, in that someone is instructed by staff not to do something, and can sometimes receive a written warning to that effect. I believe that some of the problems exist in how we view & treat these warnings. They are (or should be) effectively notes that say "Hey, I've talked to this person and told them what happened wasn't allowed." If we don't note the encounter, someone could ignore the staff's verbal warning and go break the rule again despite being informed that it was against the rules, and they'd probably just receive a verbal warning again. The problem is, it seems like people believe that these warnings are an indication of the player's behaviour or attitude, and sometimes they're considered against them if they apply for RP or staff positions - which effectively makes them punishments instead of the notes they should ultimately be.

I don't personally believe the solution to the underlying problem lies in "removing invisible rulings". While transparency is great the reality of it is seldom few people will actually go out of their way to read the rules especially if they're extensive and wordy. I do agree that there should be (and I hope that there already is) some leniency with some more obscure rulings, or situations where it would be difficult to determine whether something should be OK or not, but I believe that a majority of the cases where someone is receiving a written warning/ban they did something they ought to have known may not be okay. At the end of the day, you can always ask staff if you're allowed to do something before doing it and you can always file a complaint if you believe you've received a warning in error. These options cover off most of the issues that crop up from people being punished due to "invisible rulings".

All that "invisible rulings" should do is provide a left and right of arc for staff to consider when adjudicating. With or without the "invisible rulings", odds are you could still have staff telling you not to do something if they perceive it to be negative for server health, a balancing/fairness issue or otherwise doesn't make sense for immersive roleplay. Rulings simply help to relieve some of the tension between staff and player as they have something more concrete to reference if the player disagrees with their decision/adjudication. I fear that without that reference point, there will be more tension & conflict as players believe staff are "making up rules" arbitrarily.

I am certain that with critical thinking, patience and community feedback there is a balance that can be struck between ensuring a well-moderated experience, and ensuring players are not nervous to play "their way".
 
vvvvvv4203 said:
Dawg that is NAWT what we are talking about. We realize that invisible rulings aren't something only staff can see. (Although half the time you don't know because staff don't publicly TALK about it.) The problem is how quickly you get warned for breaking said invisible rules.
Click to expand...
Staff do actually have a secret list of clarifications that they can access, though. That is an actual thing that exists. There's a thread in Discord that only staff can see with a bunch of SL clarifications in that, when I was staff, was regularly added to at every staff meeting. It's a massive list that's a pain to search. If they just turned that into a forum thread that was publicly available, that would be great. It'd even be better for staff, because searching a Discord thread sucks and is nearly impossible.
 
Zen said:
Staff do actually have a secret list of clarifications that they can access, though. That is an actual thing that exists. There's a thread in Discord that only staff can see with a bunch of SL clarifications in that, when I was staff, was regularly added to at every staff meeting. It's a massive list that's a pain to search. If they just turned that into a forum thread that was publicly available, that would be great. It'd even be better for staff, because searching a Discord thread sucks and is nearly impossible.
Click to expand...
There's probably a good reason they keep it to staff-only, I imagine @Yeke would be able to shed light on it.
 
Harold Hawks said:
There's probably a good reason they keep it to staff-only, I imagine @Yeke would be able to shed light on it.
Click to expand...
I can't think of any actual reason. The only thing I can think of is that people then might complain about "why is there this massive list of minor details to look through", but people are complaining now anyway because they don't have it. Might as well just make it public, and then people can stop complaining they didn't know Minor Detail #54812 from the SL Clarifications thread until they were warned for it, because that info was equally available to them and to the staff member warning you for it, and if they knew, you could have known, too. People wouldn't be expected to know all of them off by heart - I certainly didn't, even as staff back then - but at the very least, if you're uncertain if e.g. you're allowed to repair stuff while in a dimension, you can open the thread, Ctrl+F for "repair" or "dimension" and find the clarification easily.
 
Zen said:
I can't think of any actual reason. The only thing I can think of is that people then might complain about "why is there this massive list of minor details to look through", but people are complaining now anyway because they don't have it. Might as well just make it public, and then people can stop complaining they didn't know Minor Detail #54812 from the SL Clarifications thread until they were warned for it, because that info was equally available to them and to the staff member warning you for it, and if they knew, you could have known, too. People wouldn't be expected to know all of them off by heart - I certainly didn't, even as staff back then - but at the very least, if you're uncertain if e.g. you're allowed to repair stuff while in a dimension, you can open the thread, Ctrl+F for "repair" or "dimension" and find the clarification easily.
Click to expand...
My thought is because its a long list they update on whims, probably sometimes some of those invisible rules warn a player, then some other staff comes by in a meeting and says "hey i dont think we should warn/ban TGs for using their abilities in their CC as the player does not have any way to know the shouldn't use them" and they remove it from the list

IMO they won't release it as it will be some hard work to keep it updated and it also probably removes some maneuvers staff can do while applying warns/bans if people get a list of more rules

Per the suggestion hard +Support
 
To make my point more clear. I do not agree with REMOVING invisible rulings. I'm for removing being warned instantly for doing something you had no way of knowing was wrong.
 
Zen said:
Staff do actually have a secret list of clarifications that they can access, though. That is an actual thing that exists. There's a thread in Discord that only staff can see with a bunch of SL clarifications in that, when I was staff, was regularly added to at every staff meeting.
Click to expand...
If that is the case. That discord thread channel could be set to read only for non staff. Resolving the issue of invisible rulings with a very simple permissions change.
It wouldn't be ideal, but a disorganized list is better than no list at all.
 
Avery Snow said:
If that is the case. That discord thread channel could be set to read only for non staff. Resolving the issue of invisible rulings with a very simple permissions change.
It wouldn't be ideal, but a disorganized list is better than no list at all.
Click to expand...
I'd rather it be turned into a forums thread, because then:
  1. It can actually be linked to on the forums from the rulings thread or whatever.
  2. You can actually search in it, because Discord threads suck and are impossible to navigate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back