Official IRON Announcement

[Dochartaigh]

congrats JB.

[Lucas Perry]

Jonathan, you are about to be allowed to play again.

[Nobama]

Jonathan, you are about to be allowed to play again.

So Valhalla still has not released him?

[erikz]

o/ IRON!

Great to see people releasing JB!

[HeinousOne]

With all the major happenings that are proof positive of the fact that "The times, they are a changin'" for me there is no greater proof then finding myself in such total agreement with statements of Revanche.

Well said.

[Cataduanes]

yay! great news

Edited April 15, 2009 by Cataduanes

[Denial]

With all the major happenings that are proof positive of the fact that "The times, they are a changin'" for me there is no greater proof then finding myself in such total agreement with statements of Revanche.

Well said.

Eventually everyone sees the light and accepts my warm embrace

[shahenshah]

So, IRON continues to employ the abhorrent practice of EZI in punishing political opponents. After all, IRON government has made it perfectly clear that PZI and EZI are synonymous. You do not deserve praise for this 'change' in policy. It is nothing more than a transparent attempt to garner a few points in the public arena.

IRON Government actually made it clear that it was a mistake by a councilor where he said that PPI and EZI are synonymous, have you read the thread?

Edited April 15, 2009 by shahenshah

[uaciaut]

Perma-ZI means we're at war with you until we say we aren't at war with you anymore and making a new nation does not change this.

Yeah, that's pretty much what people nowadays call e-zi.

You have to realize bakunin that it's impossible to see into the future and see who will reroll and want to nuke you again and who will reroll and just leave you alone. Of course there always will be plenty of circumstances that will clue you in regarding what someone's intentions would be, but you will most likely never be sure (and some people are very good actors really).

Either way by trying to impose and maintain that mentality of yours you're pretty much encouraging a lot of people to dislike you and even more to be two-faced in relations with you. Basically people who dislike you have the active option of either being open about (resulting in a very quick departure from the game) or getting themselves allied to you and waiting for an opportunity to "fix" things. So i don't think your mentality works out best for your alliance's safety in the long run as well for obvious reasons.

You may label this as idealistic but i think the real problem with e-zi is that it removes ability of choice. It's like a never-ending cycle of hate that instead of discouraging you're fueling it even more. Well good luck with that.

[Denial]

IRON Government actually made it clear that it was a mistake by a councilor where he said that PPI and EZI are synonymous, have you read the thread?

Would you mind pointing me in the direction of IRON's clearly-stated policy on EZI and PZI? FinsterBaby did mention that Iamthey was unaware of IRON policy, but chose not to explain exactly what the policy is. Further, the logs Doitzel posted of a conversation between Jonathan Brookbank and FinsterBaby appears as if IRON still does believe that EZI and PZI are synonymous. The fact remains that IRON will continue to practice PZI against political opponents, dissidents, or people that simply do something that IRON doesn't like. Whether that extends to chasing players across rerolls is still up in the air, as far as I'm concerned.

[Ventus ex Gutter]

Much gratitude.

[Delta1212]

You may label this as idealistic but i think the real problem with e-zi is that it removes ability of choice. It's like a never-ending cycle of hate that instead of discouraging you're fueling it even more. Well good luck with that.

This is a very large reason why I don't do it, myself. In an environment where people cannot be killed, the only way to truly remove a threat is to befriend it, or at least to work to remove as much animosity as possible and in doing so reduce the likelihood of action being taken for it. EZI is like sweeping dirt under the rug. It may look the same as disappearing for awhile, but it doesn't go away. It just keeps building up.

[crushtania]

Good to see here, IRON

[Doitzel]

IRON Government actually made it clear that it was a mistake by a councilor where he said that PPI and EZI are synonymous, have you read the thread?

Have you read the thread? I posted logs where FinsterBaby gave the same explanation of Iamthey's that Finster conveniently called a "mistake" in this thread. There has been no rebuking or clarification so as far as we can tell you guys haven't got a bloody clue what your policy is.

[WorkingClassRuler]

Much love to IRON for this announcement I'm glad we're seeing the end of this practice.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Working_Class_Ruler

[Joe Kremlin]

This whole thing could have been handled with about 15 fewer threads. Congrats on getting off ZI though.

[iamthey]

I like how he has to play by your rules and can't politically oppose you without being dumped back on EZI. Clean slate, indeed!

We don't have an EZI policy Doitzel, the only reason this took awhile was that JB did not want to start a new character he wanted to continue the previous. That being said your point that we have not really "freed" him is moot, hes the same character the same bagage is still following him. Moreover all that's saying is if JB gives us a new reason to ZI him the JB character will go back on the PZI list. Never the less he is now free to again play.

Moreover to address the explanation I gave. In the past (eg several years ago) the terms EZI and PZI were more or less synonymous, that was a different time with for the most part a different set of leaders. However of late (and over the last year or so) we have been of the mindset that EZI which is the ZI of a person's character based on a previous character irrespective of current actions (basically just because its connected to the previous character through IP or they have admitted to that being their previous reroll ect) is unneeded and inconsistent with how we generally operate. Instead the term PZI which is the continued ZI of a person's character is sufficient to cover any future or present possibility. The reason there was confusion is the simple fact that IRON does not generally operate with those legal terms. Historically we have not attempted to hunt down new characters, so if someone does come up its generally because they have chosen to reclaim their previous character and make it a part of their new IC. That being said in the past we have had ZI, and ZI until you are removed from the list. So when one of these cases came up we would evaluate the matter and make a judgment. We would not as others might think irrationally bind our hands to one particular ruling and go after a person just because they are the same player. Contrarily I believe in all cases we have let them go. (I mean we only have four people on there, basically just vox founders). However spending the majority of my time in IRON I am used to their terminology and as a result just lumped in EZI with the term PZI as there are cases where a person's new character will be called into question and a decision would have to be made, but in all those cases its really just a manifestation of PZI as the person has reclaimed the previous character. That being said if a person on the PZI list rerolls and actually maintains a new character, since we don't hunt people down they would be left alone and allowed to continue. Moreover since we don't distribute the previous IP's of our PZI's, other alliances have no way of knowing if they are on our list and that further protects their new character. If they however decide to identify themselves as the previous character and tell others about it, or came to us and asked us to remove them from the list, we would at that point look at what they are doing now. If they haven't returned to the previous activities and are just playing the game (eg if there was not a new independent reason to ZI them based on the new character), we'd remove the previous character from the list.

We have never to my knowledge gone to another alliance with nothing more than an IP and demanded them expel a member so we could ZI them. That being said we do not EZI when I explained it to JB, my explanation was based on an outdated conception which we no longer adhere to. Finally Doitzel even if you want to believe that I was in fact describing an interpretation we were using at the time fine, we have since changed our minds.

EDIT: Further while we reserve the right to continue to ZI a character we have never kept a person on there forever. So really we are not even pushing for the destruction of a ruler. It's just a long term ZI.

Edited April 15, 2009 by iamthey

[Redoran]

Huzzah.

[Denial]

Further while we reserve the right to continue to ZI a character we have never kept a person on there forever. So really we are not even pushing for the destruction of a ruler. It's just a long term ZI.

At the risk of sounding like a 70 year old man - that's how they get ya. As your comment clearly displays, the ambiguous and vague statements in the recent slew of announcements were entirely intentional. Particularly amusing is this new phrase of "the destruction of a ruler." Oh, it's not permanent ZI, it's just "long term"!

Edited April 15, 2009 by Revanche

[WarriorConcept]

At the risk of sounding like a 70 year old man - that's how they get ya. As your comment clearly displays, the ambiguous and vague statements in the recent slew of announcements were entirely intentional. Particularly amusing is this new phrase of "the destruction of a ruler." Oh, it's not permanent ZI, it's just "long term"!

It's not an insurgency, it's a peace keeping mission

[Heft]

At the risk of sounding like a 70 year old man - that's how they get ya. As your comment clearly displays, the ambiguous and vague statements in the recent slew of announcements were entirely intentional. Particularly amusing is this new phrase of "the destruction of a ruler." Oh, it's not permanent ZI, it's just "long term"!

IRON has always operated with a certain amount of vagueness in policy. You'd be very hard pressed to find IRON ever coming out and saying "We are going to always do this in this specific way." Just like the last time this came up, the people sitting here criticizing IRON's policies and actions are either ignorant of how IRON has actually carried out those policies, or are just trying to score points by manipulating everyone else's ignorance. All of this complaining about IRON's PZI policies is just ridiculous. How Iamthey just explained it is how it's been done. Criticizing IRON for insisting that individual situations should be judged independent of other situations, or that a single set in stone procedure isn't desirable, is kind of like criticizing the NPO for having an Emperor. Not that this will stop the scaremongering and "argh bad!" complaints, especially after Bak's little rampage through this thread, but, yea.

[jerdge]

IRON

(This must be CN's love day?)

Edited April 15, 2009 by jerdge

[KinKiac]

You act like it's impossible to get off of a perma-ZI list.

It took me six months to get off, even after I had been fighting since April of that year (I first approached Moo for peace in October). I was continually told to wait longer, as if there was a minimum period that had to be waited for release.

OOC: A month is a long time in this game. Six months is an eternity. EZI makes the game considerably less enjoyable, and having to wait almost half a year......most would just quit. I mean, what is the point of continuing to play if you're not having any fun?

These are my feelings exactly. If I was ever placed on PZI or EZI(especially EZI) I would probably just quit. I have never been on any ZI list and have only been ZI'd once( I was a noob and just did very badly in war) and even with just a ZI it was enough to make me quit for about 4-6 months, until a RL buddy of mine convinced me to come back. This is just my humble opinion, but I believe we need more people playing this game. More people = more trades, more tech sellers more buyers, more people to recruit, hell more people to argue with, lol. Having the 2 largest alliances in the game following policies that prevent some of the more active players from playing kinda goes counter to that. Im assuming that players on a ZI list are active, otherwise they wouldnt have pissed people off enough to get on a ZI list in the first place.

OOC: I realize this post may be a bit late but I was following the thread last night at work and this is the first Ive been able to sign on since then

[iamthey]

At the risk of sounding like a 70 year old man - that's how they get ya. As your comment clearly displays, the ambiguous and vague statements in the recent slew of announcements were entirely intentional. Particularly amusing is this new phrase of "the destruction of a ruler." Oh, it's not permanent ZI, it's just "long term"!

What do you wish for us to do? We are people judging with the information at the time. When we sentance a person to ZI there is no way to know how long is sufficient. So when a person gets off the list is entirely dependent upon their own decisions and actions. If they decide to reform and not continue to do whatever put them on the list then they get off, if not then they stay. The point is we are not going to lock ourselves into any legalistic language, and say we have to ZI this person until they delete, or we only can zi this person for four months that's silly. Rather the statement is you are on ZI until you merit removal. And you are really ignoring the main point there which is that we do not have an EZI policy. You asked us to clarify our policy so I did, we make judgments and considerations there is no set group of criteria, no check list which determines when a person gets off its just whenever we believe the case to be resolved. As I said before I know we have had numerous legacy PZI's in the past and all of them have since been released; we only have 4 or 5 PZI's now all are vox founders who continue to be part of that organization and therefore continue to warrant their places on that list. You should be judging us by what we are doing not whatever token documents we sign or pledges we make to commit to one policy or another. Heft pretty well summed up my sentiments in regards to your response as well.

Rebel Virgina: You did get off the list though correct?

Edited April 15, 2009 by iamthey

[PrideAssassin]

IRON does not have an EZI policy.

End of story.

Whatever fairy tales other folk wish to spin from thin air and the scars of wounded pride does make for amusing reading though.