[busyrobot]

I totally agree with you Tseng.

I may be mistaken, but I figure part of Samurai's problem is that

1) They feel insecure enough that they are unwilling to expel strong players, who thus get to do whatever they want, as they want them there if a war breaks out.

2) They get the whole long story from people caught PKing, from 'he started it' or 'he said he pwnz you so I killed him' or 'he wasn't on tag', 'I forgot I was on tag' or 'I went off tag for that 3 seconds to kill him' etc etc etc.

My thought is if people are forced to enter peaceful mode,

1) They are still members and will still be around in a kingdom war to defend their kingdom, so it is preferrable to enforce for Samurai.

2) You need a stronger case to expel someone than you need to force them to use peaceful mode for 3-7 days (first offense).

3) Once in peaceful mode, there is no ambiguity, if you kill someone *anyone* you have to be by the game mechanics have entered battlemode while prohibited and are fit for expulsion. You cannot claim self-defense because you don't need self-defense in peaceful mode. It is easy to check up on if someone is in peaceful mode as ordered, a suprise inspection with cause critial wounds should do the trick, and if they are complying no harm done.

I agree Samurai needs to change its ways, that really that is the cause of the problem. And wars over PKing are more than stupid.

This problem is not new, and I don't think the probation-peaceful thing will solve it, but I think it may help diffuse some of the tension and give Samurai some tools that don't require them to expel people right away who act badly.

I hope I am not belaboring the idea, but I'd like to discuss if it is viable or flawed, and if it can be integrated as part of the larger solution, which is yet to manifest it self.