Bottom post of the previous page:
So it's about time to address the elephant in the room.Goofball has gotten some flack for "campaigning" in ooc lately. And by flack, I mean mutes and kicks and (i think) threats of bans.
At 7am GMT monday, the elections ends, but one lingering question remains in my mind. Where is the line.
While goofball is getting muted from ooc for shilling for votes, in other elections candidates have abused their ability to utilize html enabled admin tools to campaign in big bold text. One candidate even popularizing the phrase "remember: put me up top, and goofball down on the bottom" by shilling using admin announce and ooc.
At the end of the day, I want the elections to be ran as unbiasedly as possible. Flaky rules subject to discretion are not unbiased. For the election, and where the lines are for ooc vote shilling, I want to create sharp well defined lines in the sand that can not be subjected to selective enforceful on the whims of admin biases.
As much as I and just about all of the admin team does not like the idea of goofball as headmin, this dislike should not be able to influence his ability to run for headmin in the player election.
So my question to you, for this thread: Where should the line be drawn.
How should we decide how much ooc shilling is too much? Should we even care? Should we forbid the use of admin tools like admin announce or injecting html into ooc messages for election shilling. What about if non-running admins use it to shill for the candidates they like?
